YAZARLARIN AKADEMİK YAZI YAYIMLARKEN DÜZELTME SÜRECİNDE DİKKAT ETMESİ GEREKEN HUSUSLAR

Authors receive corrections from editors and referees during the publication process of academic studies. Authors should pay attention to speed up this process and make it effective and efficient. In this study, it is aimed to determine the issues that the authors should take into consideration in the correction process when publishing academic papers. The main reasons for the research are the lack of manuscripts, including the issues that should be considered by the authors in the correction process, and the need for suggestions to provide good guidance to the authors. The main purpose of the study was how to manage a good correction process, and the findings of previous studies related to the field were also used while preparing the interview questions as a data collection tool. The aim of the study is also to determine the steps that the authors should follow in the correction phase of the academic writing process, and how they correct the feedback received from the editors. According to the findings of the research, all feedbacks from editors and referees should be read first in the correction process. Subsequently, each section of the manuscript should be corrected separately and sequentially, the division of work should be done firstly in multi-author studies, authors should create feedback-correction checklists, and multi-author studies should be checked by all authors. Finally, the feedback in all sections should be reviewed and evaluated by all authors, if the correction cannot be completed on time, additional time should be requested and the editor or referees should be contacted and informed about the corrections. Authors state that all feedback of editors and referees should be understood clearly during the correction process, and that it will be beneficial to use the language effectively and to get help from the people who have a good command of the language. However, research, author, interpreter, academic work and editor / referee communication should be provided and the process of correction should be consulted by experts or other people. According to the authors, very detailed information about the method used in the studies should be given and realistic findings and theoretical literature should be supported in order to base all the writings on the subject for solid reasons. When all these are evaluated thoroughly and carefully, the correction process can result in a very easy and more efficient positive result.