(Peer-reviewed Process Regulations)

Peer-Reviewed Process Regulations

  1. General Regulations
  • Confidentiality: The journal maintains the confidentiality of both reviewers and authors throughout the review process to ensure objectivity. The double-blind review system is commonly used.
  • Neutrality and Integrity: Reviewers must evaluate all papers with complete neutrality and without any intellectual, personal, or institutional bias.
  • Scientific Originality: Any paper that is plagiarized, duplicated, or previously published elsewhere will be rejected. A plagiarism rate below 15% is required.
  • Specialization: Each paper is assigned to reviewers who are specialists in the same field to ensure a precise academic evaluation.
  • Adherence to Deadlines: Reviewers must complete their evaluations within the set timeframe (usually two to four weeks).
  1. Reviewer Selection Regulations
  • The reviewer must hold an academic title of at least Assistant Professor in the same specialization.
  • The reviewer should have a record of published research in the field of specialization.
  • There must be no direct relationship between the reviewer and the author (such as prior supervision or joint publications).
  • The journal reserves the right to disqualify a reviewer who fails to meet standards or deadlines.
  1. Paper Evaluation Criteria
  • Originality: The novelty and contribution of the topic to knowledge.
  • Clarity of Problem and Objectives: Accuracy in defining the research problem and objectives.
  • Scientific Methodology: The appropriateness of the research method for the topic.
  • Results Analysis and Discussion: Accuracy in presenting and discussing results.
  • Language and Style: Clarity, coherence, and academic precision.
  • Documentation and References: Compliance with a recognized citation style and relevance of sources.
  • Scientific and Practical Value: The usefulness and applicability of the findings.
  1. Final Decision Regulations
  • Accept the paper for publication as it is.
  • Accept with minor revisions.
  • Reconsider after major revisions.
  • Reject the paper with detailed scientific justification.
  1. Ethical Regulations of Review
  • Reviewers must not use any part of the reviewed paper for personal or research purposes.
  • Reviewers must not discuss or disclose the paper’s contents to others.
  • Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest before starting the review.
  • Authors must respond to reviewers’ comments with respect and scientific evidence.
  1. Publication Approval Regulations
  • After completing all review stages and required revisions, the Editor-in-Chief issues the final acceptance decision.
  • The paper is assigned a serial number and a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) for indexed journals.
  • The author receives an official acceptance notice and a publication approval certificate.