Review Process & Guide for Referees

Peer-review Process

Preliminary Examination and Plagiarism Screening: The editor reviews the study for compliance with the journal publication principles, academic writing rules, and the APA Style. It is scanned about plagiarism by using intihal.net. Placenta similarity rate to be less than the %20 conditions required. 

Section Editor Review: The study carried out Preliminary Examination, and Plagiarism Screening is examined by the related section editor in terms of problematic and academic language-style. 

Referee Process (Academic Evaluation): The study, which is subjected to review by the section editor, is submitted to evaluating at least two referees who have a doctoral thesis, book, or article. The arbitration process is carried out confidentially within the framework of double-sided blind arbitration. The referee is required to present his/her opinion about the reviewed study either on the text or to justify it with an explanation of at least 150 words on the online referee form. The author is given the right to defend his/her objections and opinions if he/she disagrees with the referee's idea. The field editor provides mutual communication between the author and the referee while maintaining confidentiality. If both of the referee reports are positive, the study is submitted to the Editorial Board with a proposal to evaluate its publication. In case one of the two judges declares a negative opinion, the study is sent to a third referee. The studies can be published at least two positive decisions. Translated articles are sent to language and related field experts to assess the appropriateness of the original, the proper use of spatial concepts, and language—the translation in which the experts’ stated negative opinions are not published. The publication of book and symposium reviews and dissertation abstracts is decided due to the evaluation of the related field editors.

Correction Phase: In the case of referees requesting proofreading in the text they are examining, relevant reports are sent to the author and asked to correct them. The author presents his corrections by specifying a red color to the section editor.

Section Editor Control: The field editor checks whether the author makes the corrections requested in the text. 

Referee Control: The referee who requests correction checks whether the author has made any corrections requested from him in the text. 

The journal uses a double-sided blind review system. The referee list is published on the web page at the end of each year. 

Turkish Language Control: The works which are passed through the referees and which have a minimum of 750 words in Turkish and English extended summary are examined by Language Editor, and if necessary, the author is asked for a correction. 

English Language Control: The works passed through the Turkish Language Control are examined by English Language Editor, and if necessary, the author is asked for a correction.

Editorial Board Review: The works which are passed through technical, academic, and linguistic examination, final broadcast status is decided with a review of the Editorial Board. In case of objection from the members, the board shall decide by majority vote.

Typesetting and Layout: The works which decided to be published by the Editorial Board are made ready for publication by making the typesetting and layout of the works.

Data Transmission to National and International Indexes: The printed copies of the published issue shall be submitted to local and external reference libraries within approximately 60 days at the latest; article metadata is transmitted to related Indexes within 15 days.

• The unpublished article is archived in the journal system.
• Multiple articles of an author cannot be published in one issue.

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

The editors of the journal should hold the following ethical responsibilities that are based on the guides "COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published as Open Access by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

General duties and responsibilities

Editors are responsible for each study published in Turkish Studies. In this respect, the editors have the following roles and responsibilities:

• Making efforts to meet the demand for knowledge from readers and authors,
• Ensuring the continuous development of the journal,
• Managing the procedures aimed to improve the quality of the studies published in the journal,
• Supporting intellectual freedom,
• Ensuring academic integrity,
• Following the procedures without making concessions on intellectual property rights and ethical standards,
• Being transparent and clear in issues that require correction or explanation.

Relationships with Readers

Editors must make decisions taking into consideration the knowledge, skills, and expectations of all readers, researchers, and practitioners that they need. Editors must also ensure that the published studies should contribute to the literature and be original. Moreover, they must notify the feedback received from readers, researchers, and practitioners and provide explanatory and informative feedback.

Relationships with Authors

Editors have the following duties and responsibilities in their relations with authors:

• Editors must make positive or negative decisions about the studies' importance, originality, validity, clarity in wording, and suitability with the journal's aims and objectives.
• Editors must take the studies within the scope of the publication into the pre-review process unless there are serious problems with the study.
• Editors must not ignore positive suggestions made by reviewers unless there are serious problems with the study.
• Unless there are serious issues, new editors must not change the previous editor's decisions about the studies.
• "Blind Review and Review Process" must be published, and editors must prevent possible diversions from the defined processes.
• Editors must publish an "Author's Guide" that is comprehensive enough in answering queries by authors. This guide must be updated regularly.
• The authors should be provided with explanatory and informative feedback.

Relationships with Reviewers

Editors have the following duties and responsibilities in their relations with reviewers:

Editors must

• choose reviewers according to the subject of the study.
• Provide the information and guidance reviewers may need during the review process.
• Observe whether there are conflicting interests between reviewers and authors.
• Keep the identities of reviewers confidential in a blind review.
• Encourage the reviewers to review the manuscript in an unbiased, scientific, and objective tone.
• Evaluate reviewers regularly based on criteria like performance and timing.
• Develop practices and policies that increase the performance of reviewers.
• Take the necessary steps to update the reviewer pool dynamically.
• Prevent unkind and unscientific reviews.
• Make an effort to ensure the reviewer pool has a wide range.

Relationships with the Editorial Board

Editors must make sure that the editorial board members follow the procedures in accordance with the publication policies and guidelines and must inform the members about the publication policies and developments. The editors must also train new members of the editorial board and provide the information they need.

Moreover, editors must

• ensure that the members of the editorial board review the manuscripts in an unbiased and independent manner.
• Select the new members of the editorial board from those who can contribute to the journal and are qualified enough.
• Send manuscripts for review based on the subject of expertise of the editorial board members.
• Regularly communicate with the editorial board.
• Arrange regular meetings with the editorial board for the development of publication policies and the journal.

Relationships with the Journal's Owner and Publisher

The relationship between the editors and publishers is based on the principle of the independence of editors.

Editorial and Blind Review Processes

Editors are obliged to comply with the policies of "Blind Review and Review Process" stated in the journal's publication policies. Therefore, the editors ensure that each manuscript is reviewed in an unbiased, fair, and timely manner.

Quality Assurance

Editors must make sure that articles in the journal are published in accordance with the publication policies of the journal and international standards.

Protection of Personal Information

Editors are supposed to protect the personal information related to the subjects or visuals in the studies being reviewed and to reject the study if there is no documentation of the subjects' consent. Furthermore, editors are supposed to protect the personal information of the authors, reviewers, and readers.

Encouraging Ethical Rules and the Protection of Human and Animal Rights

Editors are supposed to protect human and animal rights in the studies being reviewed and must reject the experimental studies which do not have ethical and related committee’s approval about the population given in such studies.

Precautions against possible Abuse and Malpractice

Editors are supposed to take precautions against possible abuse and malpractice. They must conduct investigations meticulously and objectively in determining and evaluating complaints about such situations. They must also share the results of the investigation.

Ensuring Academic Integrity

Editors must make sure that the mistakes, inconsistencies, or misdirections in studies are corrected quickly.

Protection of Intellectual Property Rights

Editors are responsible for protecting the intellectual property rights of all the articles published in the journal and the rights of the journal and author(s) in cases where these rights are violated. Also, editors must take the necessary precautions in order to prevent the content of all published articles from violating the intellectual property rights of other publications.

Constructiveness and Openness to Discussion

Editors must

• pay attention to the convincing criticism about studies published in the journal and must have a constructive attitude towards such criticism.
• Grant the right of reply to the author(s) of the criticized study.
• Not ignore or exclude the study that includes negative results.

Complaints

Editors must examine the complaints from authors, reviewers, or readers and respond to them in an explanatory and enlightening manner.

Political and Economic Apprehensions

Neither the owner of the journal, publisher or any other political or economic factor can influence the editors' independent decision-making.

Conflicting Interests

Editors, acknowledging that there may be conflicting interests between reviewers and other editors, guarantee that the publication process of the manuscripts will be completed in an independent and unbiased manner.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

The fact that all manuscripts are reviewed through “Blind Review” has a direct influence on the publication quality. This process ensures confidentiality by an objective and independent review. The review process at Turkish Studies is carried out on the principle of double-blind review. Reviewers do not contact the authors directly, and the reviews and comments are conveyed through the journal management system. In this process, the reviewer comments on the evaluation forms, and full texts are assigned to the author(s) by the editor. In this context, the reviewers doing review work for Turkish Studies are supposed to bear the following ethical responsibilities:

Reviewers must

• agree to review only in their subject of expertise.
• Review in an unbiased and confidential manner.
• Inform the editor of the journal if they think that they encounter a conflict of interest and decline to review the manuscript during the review process.
• Dispose of the manuscripts they have reviewed in accordance with the principle of confidentiality after the review process. Reviewers can use the final versions of the manuscripts they have reviewed only after publication.
• Review the document objectively and only in terms of its content and ensure that nationality, gender, religious and political beliefs, and economic apprehension do not influence the review.
• Review the manuscript in a constructive and kind tone, avoid making personal comments, including hostility, slander, and insult.
• Review the document, and they have agreed to review it on time and in accordance with the ethical rules stated above.
• See. Guidance for Peer Reviewers

Login the system

Go to the website of the journal. Click on the "Register" section, fill in the requested information and click the "Save" button.

After your membership is approved by the editor, click “Login.” You will be included in your own system within the journal by writing your e-mail and password.

After entering the system, click on “Go to Referee Home Page” from the menus on the left. When you click on "Assigned Articles" from the page that opens, you will reach the list of articles assigned to you for review. Click the "Detail" section to the article title's far-right and download the blue icon word document added by the author to your computer. If you agree to evaluate the article, click on “Accept Refereeing” if you do not agree, click on “Reject” from the bottom of the page. If you have correction suggestions on the text, add the file containing your recommendations for correction from the “Click to browse” section in the “Upload file” window. Make your final decision from the last "Result" section. In your opinion, if you deem it appropriate for the related article to be published in this state, select the “Publishable” option; if you want it to be corrected and see the correction, select “I Want to See the Article After It Has Been Edited” option. If you want it to be corrected, but you don’t want to see the correction again, please select the "I Don't Want to See the Article After Editing" option. If you do not find it suitable to be published, select the "Unpublishable" option, click "Submit," and finalize your report.