Referee Guide
Referee Guide
Considering that Edeb Erkan aims to publish original and important articles, we ask the referees to help us evaluate the article submissions we receive.
Below are some tips on the article refereeing process, how to become a referee, and how to write a good review. Also included are our terms and conditions for refereeing based on the COPE Principles, which provide more information on how to conduct an objective and constructive review.
Edeb Erkan journal has adopted a double blind refereeing model.
Selection of Referees
The referees are selected among experts who have a PhD degree in the field of science to which the article relates and who have publications. The information of the experts from Turkish universities can be accessed from YÖK Academic website and the information of the experts from abroad can be accessed from Publons.
Duties & Responsibilities of Referees
1) Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Referees should be aware of any personal bias and take this into account when refereeing an article. The referee should clearly express his/her judgements in support of his/her decision.
2) Contribution to Editorial Decision: Peer-reviewed assists the editor in making editorial decisions and provides the author with the opportunity to improve the manuscript. In this respect, a referee who feels inadequate in refereeing an article or who thinks that he/she cannot complete the review in a short time should not accept the referee invitation.
3) Confidentiality: All manuscripts received by the journal for review must be kept confidential. Referees should not share reviews or information about the manuscript with anyone. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer-reviewed should be kept confidential and should not be used for personal gain.
4) Sensitivity to Violations of Research & Publication Ethics: Referees should be alert to potential ethical issues in the manuscript and report them to the editor.
5) Conflict of Interest: Referees should not agree to review a manuscript with potential conflicts of interest arising from their relationship with the authors or the organisations with which the manuscript is affiliated.
6) Referee Citation Request: If a referee suggests that an author include citations to the referee's (or their collaborators') work, this should be for genuine scientific reasons and not for the purpose of increasing the referee's citation count or the visibility of their work. See also Code of Ethics for referees.
Making a Review
Referees' reviews should be objective. During the refereeing process, referees are expected to make their reviews by considering the following points.
- Does the article contain new and important information?
- Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article?
- Is the methodology described in a coherent and understandable manner?
- Are the interpretations and conclusions substantiated by the findings?
- Are adequate references given to other studies in the field?
- Is the language quality adequate?
- Do the Abstract/Özet, Keywords/Anahtar Kelimeler accurately reflect the content of the article?
Refereeing Process Principles
Review Principles
1) Manuscripts that have not been previously published or are not currently under review for publication in another journal and approved by each author are accepted for review.
2) Submitted and pre-checked manuscripts are scanned for similarity check using iThenticate.
3) Edeb Erkan journal carries out a double blind refereeing process. All manuscripts will first be evaluated by the editor for suitability for the journal. Manuscripts deemed suitable are sent to at least two independent expert referees to assess the scientific quality of the manuscript.
4) The editor evaluates manuscripts independently of the ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs and political philosophy of the authors. He/she ensures that manuscripts submitted for publication undergo a fair double blind peer-reviewed.
5) The editor does not allow conflicts of interest between authors, editors and referees.
6) The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles. The editor's decision is final.
7) Editors are not involved in decisions about manuscripts written by themselves or by family members or colleagues, or that relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures.
Referees should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published, and should report to the editor if they discover any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author.
If the referee does not feel qualified in the subject matter of the manuscript or is unlikely to be able to provide timely feedback, he/she should inform the editor and ask him/her not to involve himself/herself in the refereeing process.
During the refereeing process, the editor should make it clear to referees that manuscripts submitted for review are the private property of the authors and that this is a privileged communication. Referees and editorial board members may not discuss manuscripts with other individuals. Care should be taken to keep the identity of the referees confidential.
Refereeing Process
Refereeing Type: Double Blind
Double Blinding: After the plagiarism check, eligible manuscripts are evaluated by the editor in terms of originality, methodology, importance of the subject covered and compatibility with the scope of the journal. The editor ensures that the manuscripts undergo double-blind refereeing in a fair manner and if the manuscript meets the formal requirements, it is submitted to the review of at least two referees from Turkey and/or abroad, and if the referees deem it necessary, the referees approve the publication of the manuscript after the requested changes are made by the authors.
Refereeing Process Time: Pre-Publication
Author-Referee Interactions: Editors mediate all interactions between referees and authors.
Average Time in Review: 60 Days
Acceptance Rate: We publish approximately 70% of the articles received by our journal.
Similarity Check: Yes-To prevent plagiarism, articles are scanned with iThenticate.
Number of Referees Refereeing Each Article: Two-three
Decision: In order for the article to be accepted for publication by the Editor, at least two referees must make an acceptance decision.
Suspicion of Ethical Violation: Referees should inform the Editor if they suspect misconduct in the research or publication. The Editor is responsible for taking the necessary actions in accordance with COPE recommendations.
The Editor reviews the research article on the day of submission and if he/she thinks that the article is worthy of further consideration, he/she sends it to the Deputy Editor for a more detailed review. For research articles, the deputy editor usually reads each article thoroughly. We aim to reach an initial decision for all manuscripts within two or three weeks, but usually the initial decision is made within a few days of submission. If we do not think that Edeb Erkan is the right journal for the study, we will notify the authors immediately so that they can send their work elsewhere without delay. The usual reasons for rejection at this stage are insufficient originality and the topic being outside the scope of the journal.
If your article is suitable for Edeb Erkan, the editor will send your article to two external referees. The referees advise the editors who make the final decision. We ask the referees to approve their reports and to declare any conflicts of interest on the manuscript we send them. The final decision is made by the Editor after external peer-reviewed processes.
In cases where serious research misconduct is suspected, some manuscripts may also be reviewed by the ethics editor of Edeb Erkan and third parties deemed appropriate by the editor.
For all manuscripts, we aim to reach a final decision on publication within 2 weeks of submission. If we propose a publication subject to revision, we usually ask authors to revise their articles and upload them to the system.
Edeb Erkan journal provides open access to articles as part of its commitment to readers and authors. All our articles are freely accessible online.
If you notice any errors in your published article, you can send an e-mail to the Editor who will let you know if the correction will be made.
Refereeing Process Guidelines for the Work of the Editorial Staff
If the members of our journal boards publish an article in our journal, all their duties in the relevant issue will be suspended. Violation of the blind refereeing system is not allowed in any way. Such publications cannot exceed 1/3 of the total articles in the issue.
Responsibilities of Authors
The author must comply with research and publication training.
The author should not attempt to publish the same work in more than one journal.
The author should indicate the works that he/she has used in the writing of the article in the references.
Responsibilities of the Editor
The editor evaluates manuscripts for scientific content without regard to the ethnic origin, gender, citizenship, religious belief or political opinion of the authors.
The editor conducts fair double-blind peer-reviewed of manuscripts submitted for publication and ensures that all information about submitted manuscripts is kept confidential before publication.
The editor informs the referees that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. Referees and the editorial board cannot discuss manuscripts with other people. The anonymity of the referees should be ensured. In certain cases, the editor may share a referee's review with other referees to clarify certain points.
The Editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication. It is also his/her responsibility to issue a correction note or retraction when necessary.
The Editor does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors and referees. He/she has full authority only to appoint referees and the Editorial Board is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of manuscripts in the journal.
Responsibilities of Referees
Referees should not have any conflicts of interest related to the research, authors and/or research funders.
Referees' reviews should be objective.
The language and style used by the referees should not offend the author.
Referees should ensure that all information regarding the submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published.
Referees should notify the Editor if they notice copyright infringement or plagiarism in the work they review.
A referee who feels inadequate to review an article or who feels that he/she cannot complete the review within the specified time should withdraw from the refereeing process.
During the refereeing process, referees are expected to consider the following points: Does the article contain new and important information? / Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article? / Is the methodology described in a coherent and understandable manner? / Are the interpretations and conclusions substantiated by the findings? / Are adequate references given to other studies in the field?
Preliminary Review & Similarity Check
The work is checked by the Editor for compliance with the journal's publication principles, academic writing rules and APA7 Citation System. Author(s) submit their work together with their iThenticate reports. The preliminary review is completed in maximum 15 days. The similarity rate must be less than 10%. If the similarity rate is 1%, but citation and quotation are not done properly, plagiarism may still be in question. In this respect, citation and quotation rules must be known and carefully applied by the author:
Citation/Indirect Quotation: If a reference is made to an opinion, discussion or determination in a source and the cited opinion is put on the line with the citing researcher's own words, it is indicated as in-text citation according to APA7 Citation System. If the citation is to a certain page or page range of the work, the page number should be given. If there is a reference to the whole work, i.e. If a reference is made to a degree that requires the reader to examine the entire work, the source should be indicated in the footnote after the phrase "See on this subject", "See about this opinion", "See about this discussion" or just "see".
Quotation/Iquotation: If the relevant part of the source is taken exactly as it is, without touching the point and comma, the quoted part is "given in double quotation marks" and the source is indicated according to APA7 Citation System. Quotations that exist in the directly quoted text are written using 'single quotes'. If the directly quoted part is longer than three lines (more than forty words), it is shown in a separate paragraph. In order to distinguish long quotations from the main text, it should be preferred to write in a font size one smaller than the normal text size and to indent the entire paragraph from the left at the beginning of the line. In direct quotations, some words, sentences and paragraphs may be omitted provided that they do not change the meaning. Ellipses (...) are placed in place of the omitted parts. It is not correct to write the part quoted verbatim from a source without enclosing it in "double quotation marks" and to be contented with just writing the source at the end. If these rules are not followed, the author may be accused of violation of publication ethics (Plagiarism).
Refereeing Process (Academic Review)
The manuscript that passes the first stages is submitted to the review of at least two external referees who have a doctoral thesis, book or article on the subject. The refereeing process is carried out in confidentiality within the framework of double blind refereeing. The referee is requested to state his/her opinion and opinion on the manuscript either on the text or to justify it with an explanation of at least 150 words on the online referee form. If the author disagrees with the referee's opinion, he/she is given the right to object and defend his/her views. The field editor ensures mutual communication between the author and the referee while maintaining confidentiality. If both referee reports are favourable, the manuscript is transferred to the typesetting stage for publication. If one of the two referees has a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third referee. Studies can be published with the positive decision of at least two referees.
Proofreading Stage
If the referees request corrections to be made in the text they have reviewed, the relevant reports are sent to the author and the author is asked to correct his/her work. The author makes the corrections in the Word program with the "Track Changes" feature turned on or indicates the changes in the text in red. Submits the corrected text to the Editor.
Editor Check
The editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections to the text.
Referee Check
The referee checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.
Turkish Language Check
The manuscripts that pass through the refereeing process are reviewed by the Editor and, if necessary, the author is asked to make corrections. The refereeing process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
English Language Control
The manuscripts that pass the Turkish language control are examined by the English Language Editor and, if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The English language editor's control process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
Typesetting & Layout Phase
The works that are decided to be published are prepared for publication by typesetting and layout and sent to the author for review. This stage takes maximum 3 days.
Data Submission to National & International Indexes
The data of the published issue is sent to the relevant indexes within 15 days.
