Peer Review Process
Blind review is a method used to make sure scientific publications are produced with the highest quality. This method forms the basis of the objective review process of scientific studies and is preferred by many scientific studies. Reviewer views are determinant in the publication quality of JODYAC. All manuscripts submitted to JODYAC are blind reviewed according to the following stages:
Blind Review Method
JODYAC, uses the double blind review method in the review process of all studies. In the double blind review method, the identities of the authors and reviewers are hidden.
Initial Review Process
The studies submitted to JODYAC are first evaluated by the editors. At this stage, the studies which are not related with the journal’s aim and scope, weak in terms of language and expression rules in Turkish and English, lack originality, contain critical scientific errors and do not meet the publication policies are rejected. The authors of rejected studies are informed in two months following the submission date. The studies that are found suitable are sent to a field editor related with the subject of study.
Pre-review Process
In the pre-review process, the field editors examine the introduction and literature, method, findings, results, discussion parts of the studies in detail in terms of journal publication policies and scope and originality. Those studies that are found suitable as a result of this examination are returned within one month at the latest together with the field editor report. And the studies which are found suitable are assigned to reviewers.
Assigning Reviewers
The studies are refereed according to the content and the expertise of the referees. The field editor who reviews the study recommends two reviewers, based on their subject of expertise, from the reviewer pool of JODYAC or may recommend a new reviewer related with the subject of study addressed in the article. The suggestions are evaluated by the editors and the studies are forwarded to the reviewers. The reviewers have to guarantee that they will not share any process and document about the studies they review.
Reviewer Reports
In general, the reviewer reports are based on the originality of the studies, methods, ethical considerations, consistent presentation of the findings and results and review of the literature. This evaluation is based on the following elements:
1. Introduction and literature: the reviewer report includes the presentation of the problem addressed in the study and it aims, the importance of the subject, the scope of the literatüre on the subject, its actuality and the originality of the study.
2. Method: the reviewer report includes views about the suitability of the research method, sample choice and properties, validity and reliability, as well as an opinion on the data collection and data analysis process.
- Findings: the reviewer report includes views about the presentation of the findings obtained through the method, the accuracy of the analysis methods, the consistency of the findings with the aim of the research, the presentation of tables, figures and visuals that are needed, and the evaluation of the tests used.
4. Evaluation and Discussion: the reviewer report includes views about discussions based on findings, the relevance to the research question(s) and hypothesis(ses), generalizability and applicability.
5. Results and Suggestions: the reviewer report includes views about contribution to literature, recommendations for future studies and suggestions about applications in the field.
6. Style and Wording: the reviewer report includes views about the content of the study title, the proper use of Turkish, the references and references being given in accordance with the language of the full text in accordance with the APA 7 rules.
7. Overall Evaluation: the reviewer report includes views about the originality of the study as a whole, its contribution to the education literature and practices in the field.
In the review process, reviewers are not expected to make corrections according to the typographic features of the study.
Reviewing Process
Reviewers are given 6 weeks for review. Corrections from reviewers or editors must be completed by the authors within 1 month in line with the “editing manual”. Reviewers can request more than one correction if necessary.
Review Result
The field editor evaluates the review by reviewers within 2 weeks at the latest. As a result of this evaluation, the field editor conveys his/her final decision to the editors.
Editorial Board Decision
Based on the comments of the Field Editor and Referee, the Editorial Board prepares conclusions regarding the study. The Editor must deliver the prepared opinions, along with the Field Editor’s and Referee’s proposals, to the author(s) within a week at the latest. Studies that have negative evaluations in this phase are sent back without a request for a plagiarism check. The outcomes of the reports from the plagiarism inspection are used to make the final judgment for research with favorable evaluations.
How Long Does the Publication Evaluation Process Take?
It is seen that the publication evaluation process of the studies submitted to JODYAC is finalized in approximately six months. However, the period between the date when the referees or editors request corrections from the author(s) and the date when the author(s) complete the corrections is not included in this six-month period.