Peer Review

Peer Review Policies

Only manuscripts that are approved by all listed authors and have not been previously published or submitted for review elsewhere will be considered for evaluation by the The Journal of Turkish World Studies.

All submissions that pass the initial screening are subjected to a plagiarism check using the iThenticate software. Manuscripts found to contain unoriginal content or significant overlap with previous publications will be rejected or returned to the authors for clarification.

Following the plagiarism check, eligible manuscripts are assessed by the Editor-in-Chief based on the following criteria:

• Originality and academic contribution,
• Methodological rigor,
• Relevance and importance of the topic within the scope of the journal,
• Compliance with submission and formatting guidelines.

Manuscripts that meet these criteria are then forwarded to at least two national or international reviewers for evaluation under a double-blind peer review process.

The final decision to publish is made by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into account the reviewers’ recommendations. Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the reviewers’ feedback before the article can be accepted for publication.

Responsibility for the Editor and Reviewers

The Editor-in-Chief assesses all submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their scientific merit, without regard to the authors’ ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religious beliefs, or political views. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for ensuring a fair and impartial double-blind peer review process and guarantees the confidentiality of all information pertaining to submitted manuscripts prior to publication.

The Editor-in-Chief bears full responsibility for the content and overall quality of the journal. When necessary, he or she is obligated to issue corrections or publish errata to maintain the accuracy and integrity of the publication.

The Editor-in-Chief shall prevent any actual or potential conflicts of interest among authors, reviewers, and editorial members. He or she retains exclusive authority to appoint reviewers and holds final responsibility for decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts submitted to the journal.

Reviewers must be free of any conflicts of interest relating to the research under review, the authors, or the funding bodies. Their evaluations must be objective and based solely on scholarly merit.

Reviewers are required to maintain strict confidentiality regarding all aspects of submitted manuscripts. If they become aware of any instances of copyright infringement or plagiarism, they must promptly report such concerns to the Editor-in-Chief.

A reviewer who does not possess the necessary expertise to evaluate a manuscript, or who is unable to provide a timely review, must immediately inform the Editor-in-Chief and withdraw from the review process.

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for informing reviewers that all manuscripts are confidential documents and that the review process constitutes a privileged form of communication. Reviewers and members of the editorial board must refrain from discussing manuscripts with any third party. The anonymity of reviewers must be rigorously protected. In exceptional circumstances, the Editor-in-Chief may disclose the content of one review to other reviewers for the purpose of clarifying specific issues.

Peer Review Process

Only those manuscripts that have been approved by all contributing authors and that have neither been previously published nor concurrently submitted to another journal shall be considered for evaluation.

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are subjected to plagiarism detection using the iThenticate software. Following this assessment, those that meet the criteria are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief for their originality, methodological rigor, the significance of the subject matter, and alignment with the scope of the journal.

The Editor-in-Chief evaluates manuscripts solely based on their scientific merit, without consideration of the authors’ ethnic background, gender, nationality, religious affiliation, or political beliefs. A fair and impartial double-blind peer review process is ensured for all qualifying manuscripts.

Selected manuscripts are submitted to at least two external referees, either national or international, for independent evaluation. The final decision regarding publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief, contingent upon the authors' revision of the manuscript in accordance with the reviewers’ recommendations.

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for ensuring the absence of any conflicts of interest among authors, editors, and reviewers, and retains ultimate authority over the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts for publication in the journal.

Reviewers are required to maintain objectivity in their evaluations. In the course of their review, they are expected to comment on the following criteria:

• Does the manuscript present novel and significant findings?
• Does the abstract accurately and clearly reflect the content of the manuscript?
• Is the research problem of scholarly relevance and clearly articulated?
• Are the methods described in sufficient detail and appropriately applied?
• Are the interpretations and conclusions supported by the data and results?
• Is the manuscript adequately referenced with relevant literature in the field?
• Is the use of language appropriate and scholarly?

Reviewers must treat all information contained in submitted manuscripts as strictly confidential. They are obliged to notify the Editor-in-Chief should they become aware of any instance of copyright violation or plagiarism on the part of the authors.

Any reviewer who feels unqualified to assess the subject matter of a manuscript, or who anticipates being unable to complete the review in a timely manner, must promptly inform the Editor-in-Chief and withdraw from the review process.

The Editor-in-Chief informs all reviewers that manuscripts under evaluation constitute confidential material and that the review process is a privileged communication. Reviewers and members of the editorial board are strictly prohibited from discussing the content of the manuscripts with any third parties. The anonymity of reviewers must be preserved at all times.