Review Process

ARTICLE EVALUATION POLICY

Double-Blind Peer Review

At Tefsiriyat Journal, the article evaluation process is conducted in accordance with the principles of double-blind peer review. In this process, the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors. The evaluation workflow consists of the stages of preliminary review, plagiarism screening, section editor review, peer review, revision and control, language review, Editorial Board decision, and publication preparation.

1. Submission Requirements

  1. Manuscripts submitted to the journal must:
  • Not have been previously published,
  • Not have been accepted for publication elsewhere,
  • Not be under evaluation by another journal,
  • Have been approved by all contributing authors.
  1. The journal evaluates submissions within the framework of scientific criteria and ethical principles.

2. Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Screening

2.1. Preliminary Review

Submitted manuscripts are reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal’s publication principles, academic writing standards, and the İSNAD Citation System. The preliminary review is completed within a maximum of 15 days.

2.2. Plagiarism Screening

Manuscripts that pass the preliminary review are screened for plagiarism using iThenticate, İntihal.net, or Turnitin.

  • A similarity rate below 20% is required.
  • Similarity reports are also evaluated qualitatively by the editor, taking into account justified similarities such as references, methodology sections, and bibliographies.

3. Editor-in-Chief Evaluation

Manuscripts that pass the plagiarism screening are evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief in terms of:

  • Originality,
  • Methodology,
  • Significance of the topic,
  • Compatibility with the journal’s aims and scope.

Manuscripts deemed unsuitable at this stage may be returned to the author without entering the peer-review process.

4. Section Editor Review

Manuscripts that pass the preliminary review and plagiarism screening are examined by the relevant Section Editor in terms of:

  • Theoretical and problem framework,
  • Academic language and style,
  • Structural coherence.

This review is completed within a maximum of 15 days.

5. Peer-Review Process

Academic Evaluation (Double-Blind Review)

  1. Manuscripts approved by the Section Editor are sent to at least two national or international reviewers who have relevant doctoral dissertations, books, or scholarly publications in the field.
  2. The peer-review process is conducted confidentially. Editors inform reviewers that the manuscript is the intellectual property of the author(s) and constitutes a privileged communication. Reviewers and editorial board members may not discuss the manuscript with third parties or contact the authors directly.
  3. Reviewers are requested to submit their evaluations either:
  • by annotating the manuscript, or
  • by providing a reasoned report of at least 150 words via the online reviewer form.
  1. Authors have the right to submit objections and defend their views if they disagree with reviewer comments. The Section Editor ensures communication between authors and reviewers while maintaining confidentiality.

6. Reviewer Decisions and Third-Reviewer Practice

  1. If both reviewer reports are positive, the manuscript is submitted to the Editorial Board with a recommendation for publication.
  2. If one reviewer report is negative, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer.
  3. Manuscripts receiving a combination of rejection and major revision are considered to fall under the negative decision category. In such cases, the manuscript may:
  • be returned to the author without being sent to a third reviewer, or
  • have the peer-review process terminated following editorial evaluation.
  1. Manuscripts may be published only with the positive evaluations of at least two reviewers.

7. Reviewer Evaluation Criteria (Minimum Checklist)

Reviewers are expected to consider the following criteria:

  1. Does the manuscript present new and significant knowledge or insight?
  2. Does the abstract clearly and accurately reflect the content of the manuscript?
  3. Is the methodology coherent and clearly described?
  4. Are the interpretations and conclusions adequately supported by the findings?
  5. Are sufficient and relevant references to the existing literature provided?
  6. Is the quality of language and academic expression adequate?

 

8. Revision Stage

  1. If reviewers request revisions, the relevant reports are forwarded to the author.
  2. Authors must indicate all revisions in red and submit the revised manuscript to the Section Editor.
  3. The revision period is at least 10 days and may be extended in cases of major revision.

9. Section Editor Control

The Section Editor verifies whether the author has adequately addressed the requested revisions. This control process is completed within a maximum of 7 days.

 

10. Reviewer Re-Evaluation (When Necessary)

Depending on the nature of the revisions, the manuscript may be resent to the same reviewers. In this stage, reviewers are again expected to provide reasoned evaluations. The process continues under double-blind and confidentiality principles.

11. Language Review

11.1. Turkish Language Review

Manuscripts that pass the peer-review process are examined by the Turkish Language Editor. If necessary, authors are requested to make corrections. This stage is completed within 15 days.

11.2. English Language Review

Manuscripts that pass the Turkish language review are examined by the English Language Editor. If necessary, authors are requested to make corrections. This stage is completed within 15 days.

12. Editorial Board Review and Final Decision

Manuscripts that pass all technical, academic, and linguistic evaluations are reviewed by the Editorial Board, which makes the final publication decision. In the event of objections, decisions are made by majority vote.

13. Typesetting and Layout

Manuscripts approved for publication undergo typesetting and layout processes and are prepared for publication.

14. Final Proofreading

After layout completion, manuscripts are published following final proofreading.

 

15. Average Evaluation Period

The average time from submission to publication is approximately 10 weeks. This period may vary depending on revision cycles, reviewer response times, and issue density.

16. Special Types of Submissions

  • Translated articles are evaluated by language and subject-area experts in terms of fidelity to the original text, correct use of field-specific terminology, and linguistic accuracy. Translations receiving negative evaluations are not published.
  • Book reviews, conference reviews, and doctoral dissertation abstracts are published based on the evaluation of the relevant Section Editor.

17. Data Submission to National and International Indexes

Printed copies of each published issue are sent to national and international reference libraries within 60 days. Article metadata are submitted to the relevant indexing databases within 15 days.