Peer Review Policy

The Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Sports Sciences applies a rigorous, transparent, and ethical peer-review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original, and scientifically sound research.

Double-Blind Peer Review

The journal operates a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the evaluation process. This system is designed to guarantee objectivity, impartiality, and fairness in the assessment of all submitted manuscripts.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submissions undergo an initial editorial screening conducted by the Editor-in-Chief and/or the Editorial Board. At this stage, manuscripts are evaluated for their relevance to the journal’s scope, scientific quality, originality, and compliance with ethical and formatting requirements. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria are rejected without external review.

Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with demonstrated academic expertise and subject-specific knowledge relevant to the manuscript. Reviewers are selected by the Editorial Board based on their scholarly competence, research experience, and publication record in the related field.

Evaluation Process

Reviewers are expected to conduct their evaluations objectively, confidentially, and within a reasonable timeframe. The peer-review process typically takes 4–6 weeks, depending on reviewer availability. Reviewers submit detailed evaluation reports and provide recommendations regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript.

Evaluation Criteria

Manuscripts are assessed based on the following criteria:

Originality and scientific contribution

Methodological rigor and appropriateness

Reliability, consistency, and clarity of results

Contribution to existing scholarly literature

Compliance with ethical standards

Quality of language and clarity of presentation

Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality

Reviewers are required to declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest related to the manuscripts they are invited to review. In cases of conflict, reviewers must inform the editor and withdraw from the review process. All information obtained during peer review is treated as strictly confidential and must not be used for personal advantage or shared with third parties.

Revision and Re-evaluation

When revisions are requested, manuscripts are returned to the authors along with reviewers’ comments. Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by the original reviewers to determine whether the required changes have been adequately addressed. If revisions are deemed insufficient, reviewers may recommend rejection.

Final Decision

The final decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board, taking full account of the reviewers’ reports and recommendations. While reviewer evaluations play a central role in the decision-making process, final responsibility rests with the editorial leadership.

Ethical Standards

The journal conducts its peer-review and editorial processes in accordance with internationally recognized principles of publication ethics and best editorial practices.