Blind Refereeing and Evaluation Process All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Islamic Studies are evaluated through a double-blind editorial reading process according to the following steps. In the double-blinding method, the author and referee identities of the manuscripts are concealed.
All manuscripts are subjected to the editorial reading process. The editorial reading process is at least 15 days for each manuscript, although it may vary depending on the size of the manuscript and transliteration requirements.

Initial Review Process
Studies submitted to the Usul Islamic Studies are first evaluated by the editor. The manuscript is examined by the editor for compliance with the journal's publication principles, academic writing rules, and the Isnad Citation System, and is scanned for plagiarism using the iThenticate or Intihal.net program. The preliminary review is completed within a maximum of 15 days. The plagiarism similarity rate must be less than 20%. If the similarity rate is 1%, but the citation and quotation are not done properly, plagiarism may still be in question. In addition, manuscripts that do not comply with the purpose and scope of the journal, are weak in terms of Turkish, English and Arabic language and expression rules, contain critical errors in scientific terms, have no original value and do not meet the publication policies are rejected. Authors of rejected manuscripts will be notified within one month at the latest from the date of submission. The eligible manuscripts are sent to an editorial assistant for preliminary evaluation in the related field.

Preliminary Evaluation Process
During the preliminary evaluation process, the assistant editor reviews the introduction and literature, method, findings, conclusion, evaluation and discussion sections of the manuscripts in detail in terms of journal publication policies and scope and originality. As a result of this review, unsuitable manuscripts are returned with the evaluation report within one month at the latest. The eligible manuscripts are taken into the referee assignment process.
The editorial board pre-evaluates the incoming manuscripts according to the above criteria.
A detailed report is not submitted for articles that are decided to be returned or rejected as a result of the preliminary evaluation.
If the article successfully passes the preliminary evaluation, it is included in the refereeing process.
If deemed necessary, the Advisory Board members may also be consulted during the preliminary evaluation process.
As a result of the preliminary evaluation, the Editorial Board decides whether the article is suitable for peer review.
An article that does not meet the minimum requirements in terms of these criteria will be rejected by the Editorial Board without refereeing.

Referee Appointment Process
Referees are assigned to the studies according to the content and the expertise of the referees. The assistant editor who reviews the study is submitted to the evaluation of at least two external referees who have a doctoral thesis, book or article on the subject. Referees must guarantee that they will not share any process and documents about the studies they evaluate.

Referee Evaluation Process
The time given to the referees for the peer review process is 6 weeks. Correction suggestions received from referees or editors must be completed by the authors within 1 month in accordance with the “correction guidelines”. Referees can decide on the appropriateness of a manuscript by reviewing the corrections, or they can request corrections more than once if necessary. Referee Reports Referee evaluations are generally based on the review of the manuscript in terms of originality, methodology, compliance with ethical rules, consistent presentation of findings and results, and literature. This review is based on the following factors:
a. Introduction and literature: the review report includes the presentation and aims of the problem addressed in the study, the importance of the subject, the scope of the literature on the subject, the timeliness and originality of the study, and the compatibility of the title, abstract and article content.
b. Methodology: The evaluation report includes opinions on the appropriateness of the method used, the selection and characteristics of the research group, information on validity and reliability, as well as the data collection and analysis process.
c. Findings: The evaluation report includes opinions on the presentation of the findings obtained within the framework of the method, the accuracy of the analysis methods, the consistency of the findings with the objectives of the research, the tables, figures and visuals needed, and the conceptual evaluation of the tests used.
d. Conclusions and recommendations: The evaluation report includes opinions on the contribution to the literature, suggestions for future studies and applications in the field.
e. Style and expression: The evaluation report includes opinions on the inclusion of the title of the study in the content, the proper use of Turkish, and the citation and references in accordance with the rules of the Isnad Citation System and the language of the full text.
f. General evaluation: The evaluation report includes opinions on the originality of the study as a whole and its contribution to the educational literature and practices in the field. During the evaluation process, reviewers are not expected to make corrections according to the typographical features of the manuscript.
If both referee reports are positive, the manuscript is submitted to the Editorial Board with a proposal to consider publication. If one of the two reviewers has a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer. Studies can be published with the positive decision of at least two referees. The publication of book and symposium reviews and doctoral thesis abstracts is decided upon the evaluation of at least two internal referees (editors of the relevant field and/or members of the editorial board).

Proofreading Phase
If the referees request corrections to be made in the text they have reviewed, the relevant reports are sent to the author and he/she is asked to correct his/her work. The author makes the corrections in the Word program with the “Track Changes” feature turned on or indicates the changes in the text in red. Submits the revised text to the field editor.

Editor Control
The editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections to the text.

Referee Check
The reviewer checks whether the author has made the requested corrections to the text.

Language Check
The manuscripts that pass through the referee process are reviewed by the Turkish and English Language Editors and the Editor-in-Chief, and if necessary, the author is asked to proofread the manuscript. The control process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.

Final Reader
After all this process, the article is checked by the final reader for compliance with the ISNAD Citation System.

Decision
Articles that pass technical, academic and linguistic reviews are examined by the Editorial Board and it is decided whether they will be published or not, and if so, in which issue they will be included. The Board decides by majority vote. In case of a tie, the final decision is made in favor of the editor's decision.

Publication Process
The articles, which undergo technical, academic and linguistic reviews, are typeset and edited, made ready for publication and published.