Reviewer Guideline

Article Review, Evaluation and Publication Process

Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Check: The manuscript is reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal's publication principles, academic writing rules and ISNAD Citation System 2 (in-text) and the similarity report uploaded by the author is checked. The similarity rate must be less than 15%.

Field Editor Review: The study, which has passed the Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Scanning stage, is examined by the relevant field editor in terms of problematic and academic language and style.

Academic Review Process: The manuscript that passes the review of the field editor is submitted to the evaluation of at least two referees who have a doctoral thesis, book or article on the subject. The referee process is carried out in confidentiality within the framework of double blind refereeing. The referee is requested to either state his/her opinion and opinion on the manuscript or justify it with an explanation of at least 150 words on the online referee form. The author is given the right to object and defend his/her views if he/she disagrees with the referee's opinions. The field editor ensures mutual communication between the author and the referee while maintaining confidentiality. If both referee reports are positive, the manuscript is submitted to the Editorial Board with a proposal for publication. If one of the two referees expresses a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third referee. Studies can be published with the positive decision of at least two referees. Translated articles are sent to language and related field experts for evaluation in terms of conformity with the original, appropriate use of field concepts and language. Translations in which the experts express a negative opinion are not published. The publication of book and symposium reviews and abstracts or introductions of master's and doctoral theses are decided upon the evaluation of the relevant field editors and, if necessary, at least 1 referee.

Academic Evaluation Period: After the authors add their work to the journal system, the work is evaluated by the editor. After the preliminary review, referees are appointed within a reasonable time (if the spelling is deemed appropriate). The evaluation period of the referees is 4 weeks after the manuscript is sent to the referee.

Revision Phase: 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 submits the corrections to the field editor by indicating them in red color.

Field Editor Review: The field editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.

Reviewer Review: The referee checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.

Our journal uses a double blind review system. The referee list is published on the web page at the end of each year or in each issue.

Turkish Language Check: The manuscripts that pass through the referee process are reviewed by the Turkish Language Editor and, if necessary, the author is asked to proofread the manuscript.

English Language Check: The manuscripts that pass the Turkish language check are reviewed by the English Language Editor and, if necessary, corrections are requested from the author.

Editorial Board Review: Articles that pass the technical, academic and linguistic reviews are reviewed by the Editorial Board and the final publication status is decided. In case of objection from the members, the Board decides by majority vote.

Typesetting and Layout Phase: The manuscripts decided to be published by the Editorial Board are made ready for publication by typesetting and layout.

Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

DASAD editors have the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the "COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as open access. Our editors are responsible for every publication published in our journal. In the context of this responsibility, they have the following roles and obligations:

To strive to meet the information needs of readers and authors,
Ensuring the continuous development of the journal,
Carrying out processes to improve the quality of studies published in the journal,
Supporting freedom of thought,
Ensuring academic integrity,
Maintaining business processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards,
Demonstrating openness and transparency in terms of publication in matters requiring correction and clarification.

 

Relations with Authors

The duties and responsibilities of our editors towards the authors are as follows:

Our editors make positive or negative decisions based on the importance, original value, validity, clarity of expression and the aims and objectives of the journal.
Our editors take the manuscripts that are suitable for the scope of publication to the preliminary evaluation stage unless there is a serious problem with the manuscript.
Our editors do not ignore positive referee recommendations unless there is a serious problem with the study.
New editors do not change the decisions made by the previous editor(s) unless there is a serious problem.
The "Blind Review and Evaluation Process" is strictly enforced and our editors try to prevent any negativity that may occur in the defined processes.
Our editors have prepared a "Writing Guidelines" that covers in detail every issue expected of them by the authors and is published on our website. This page, which serves as an author guide, is updated periodically.
Our editors provide authors with explanatory and informative notifications and feedback.

Relations with Referees

The duties and responsibilities of our editors towards the referees are as follows:

They determine the referees in accordance with the subject of the study.
They are obliged to provide the information and guidance that the reviewers will need during the evaluation phase.
They have to monitor whether there is a conflict of interest between authors and reviewers.
They keep the identity information of the reviewers confidential in the context of blinded reviewing.
Encourage reviewers to evaluate the manuscript in a neutral, scientific and objective manner.
They evaluate reviewers based on criteria such as timeliness and performance.
Develop practices and policies to improve the performance of reviewers.
Take the necessary steps to dynamically update the referee pool.
They prevent unkind and unscientific evaluations.

Relations with the Editorial Board

Our editors ensure that all editorial board members carry out the processes in accordance with the editorial policies and guidelines. They inform the editorial board members about publication policies and keep them informed about developments.

Also, our editors

They try to ensure that the editorial board members evaluate the studies impartially and independently.
They send the studies suitable for the expertise of the editorial board members for evaluation.
They regularly interact with the editorial board.
They organize meetings with the editorial board periodically for the development of editorial policies and the journal.

Editorial and Blind Review Processes

Our editors are obliged to implement the "Blind Review and Evaluation Process" policies in the journal's publication policies. In this context, our editors endeavor to ensure that the evaluation process of each study is completed in a fair, impartial and timely manner.

Quality Assurance

Our editors are responsible for the publication of each article published in the journal in accordance with the journal's editorial policies and international standards.

Protection of Personal Data

Our editors are obliged to ensure the protection of personal data regarding the subjects or images included in the evaluated studies. They are responsible for rejecting the study unless the explicit consent of the individuals used in the studies is documented. Editors are also responsible for protecting the personal data of authors, reviewers and readers.

Ethics Committee, Human and Animal Rights

Our editors are obliged to ensure the protection of human and animal rights in the evaluated studies. They are responsible for rejecting the study in the absence of ethics committee approval for the subjects used in the studies and permissions for experimental research.

Obtaining Ethics Committee Decision: As of 2020, the TR Index Journal Evaluation criteria have been updated and the articles related to the ethics committee approval required for scientific research have been detailed. The "Documents and information requested for studies requiring ethics committee approval" stated under the ethical rules heading is not expected to be applied to studies that have been submitted, in the evaluation process or accepted in previous years. It will be mandatory for publications whose process started in 2020.

* TR Index Committee Decision: "Although ethics committee permission is required by TR INDEX as of 2020, there are studies that require ethics committee permission under all circumstances in terms of scientific study ethics. When scales are used, asking permission from scale owners, obtaining consent from participants, and ethics committee permission. There should be explanations about these situations in the articles".

The studies that require Ethics Committee permission are as follows:

All kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants using survey, interview, focus group study, observation, experiment, interview techniques,
Use of humans and animals (including materials/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,
Clinical trials in humans,
Research on animals,
Retrospective studies in accordance with the law on the protection of personal data,

Also;

Stating that the "informed consent form" has been obtained in case presentations,

Obtaining and indicating permission from the owners for the use of scales, questionnaires, photographs belonging to others,

For the intellectual and artistic works used, it should be stated that copyright regulations are complied with.

Precautions Against Possible Abuse and Misconduct

Editors are obliged to take precautions against possible misconduct and malpractice. In addition to conducting a rigorous and objective investigation in identifying and evaluating such complaints, it is among the responsibilities of the editor to share the relevant findings.

Ensuring the Integrity of Academic Publications

Our editors are responsible for ensuring that errors, inconsistencies or misleading judgments are corrected quickly.

Protection of Intellectual Property Rights

Our editors are responsible for protecting the intellectual property rights of all published articles and defending the rights of the journal and the author(s) in case of possible violations. Editors are also responsible for taking the necessary measures to ensure that the contents of all published articles do not violate the intellectual property rights of other publications.

Constructivism and Openness to Discussion

Our editors

They should take into account the persuasive criticisms of the works published in our journal and show a constructive attitude towards these criticisms.
They should give the author(s) of the criticized studies the right to reply.
They should not ignore or exclude studies with negative results.

Complaints

Our editors are obliged to carefully review complaints from authors, reviewers or readers and respond in an enlightening and explanatory manner.

Political and Commercial Concerns

No political or commercial considerations on the part of the journal owner, the publisher, or others influence the independent judgment of our editors.

Conflicts of Interest

Our editors should ensure that the publication process of manuscripts is completed in an independent and impartial manner, taking into account conflicts of interest between the author(s), reviewers and other editors.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

The evaluation of all studies by "Double Blind Review" directly affects the quality of the publication. This process provides confidence through objective and independent evaluation of the publication. In our journal, the evaluation process is carried out with the principle of double blind refereeing. Reviewers cannot communicate directly with the authors, and evaluations and comments are communicated through the journal management system. In this process, reviewer comments on the evaluation forms and full texts are communicated to the author(s) through the editor. In this context, referees who evaluate studies for our journal are expected to have the following ethical responsibilities:

Accept to evaluate only studies related to their field of expertise.
They should evaluate with impartiality and confidentiality.
If they think that they are faced with a conflict of interest during the evaluation process, they should refuse to review the study and inform the journal editor.
In accordance with the principle of confidentiality, they should destroy the studies they have reviewed after the evaluation process. They can only use the final versions of the studies they have reviewed only after publication.
Evaluate objectively only with regard to the content of the study. They should not allow nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political beliefs and commercial concerns to influence the evaluation.
Conduct the evaluation in a constructive and courteous manner. They should not make derogatory personal comments containing hostility, slander and insult.
They should carry out the work they accept for evaluation on time and with the above ethical responsibilities.

Referees Login to the Journal System

Open the web page of our journal.
Click on the "Register" icon, fill in the requested information and confirm "Save".
After your membership is approved by the editorial office, click on the "Login" icon. On the page that opens, enter your e-mail and password and log in to the Referee Panel.