Reviewer Guideline
Reviewer and Editor's Guide
Reviewer Guide
Considering that the ISPEC Journal of Science Institute aims to publish original and important articles, we ask the reviewers to assist in the evaluation of the article submissions we receive.
Below are recommendations on the article review process, how to become a reviewer, and how to write a good review. We also have our arbitration terms and conditions based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Principles, which provide more information on how to conduct objective and constructive arbitration.
ISPEC Journal of Science Institute has adopted the double-blind peer review model.
Selection of Reviewers
The reviewers are selected from among experts who have a doctorate degree in the field of science related to the article and have publications. The information of the experts working in Turkish universities can be accessed from the YOK Academic website (https://akademik.yok.gov.tr/AkademikArama/) and the information of the experts abroad from Publons.
Duties and Responsibilities of the Reviewers
Objectivity
Evaluations should be done objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal biases they may have and take this into account when reviewing a manuscript. The reviewer must clearly express his or her evaluations in support of his decision.
Contribution to Editorial Decision
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and provides the author with the opportunity to improve the article. In this respect, a reviewer who feels inadequate to review an article or thinks that he will not be able to complete the review in a short time should not accept the invitation to reviewer.
Confidentiality
All articles that reach the journal for review should be kept confidential. Reviewers should not share reviews or information about the article with anyone or contact the authors directly. The information contained in the study should not be used by a reviewer in his own research without the express written permission of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
Sensitivity to Research and Publication Ethics Violations
Reviewers should be alert to possible ethical issues in the article and report them to the editor.
Conflict of Interest
Reviewers should not agree to review an article with potential conflicts of interest arising from their relationships with the authors or the institutions to which the articles are affiliated.
Request for Reviewer Citation
If a reviewer recommends that an author include citations to the reviewer's (or their partners') work, it must be for genuine scientific reasons, not to increase the reviewer's citation count or increase the visibility of their work. See also Ethical Rules for Reviewers.
Making a Review
The evaluations of the reviewers should be objective. During the reviewing process, the reviewers are expected to make their evaluations by considering the following points.
- Does the article contain new and important information?
- Does the abstract clearly and properly describe the content of the article?
- Is the method comprehensively and clearly defined?
- Are the comments and conclusions made substantiated by the findings?
- Are adequate references given to other studies in the field?
- Is the language quality adequate?
- Do the abstract/keywords accurately reflect the content of the article?
Editor's Guide
Editors' Choice
Editors are selected from among experts who have a doctorate degree and have publications in accordance with the scope of the journal's publication.
Türkiye Editors' Workshop Group
ISPEC Journal of Science Institute supports editors to keep in touch with other editors, thinking it will be useful. Our editors are members of the Türkiye Editors' Workshop Group.
Editors' Duties and Responsibilities
Coordinating the Review Process
The editor should ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial, and timely. Research articles should be reviewed by at least two external reviewers and the editor should seek additional comments when necessary.
Determination of Reviewers
The editor; will select arbitrators with appropriate expertise in the relevant field, taking into account the need for appropriate, inclusive, and diverse representation. The editor will follow best practices to avoid the selection of fraudulent reviewers.
Privacy Protection
The editor must maintain the confidentiality of all materials submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers unless otherwise agreed with the respective authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with the editors of other journals when deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct. The editor must protect the identities of the reviewers. Information contained in a submitted article should not be used in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained during the arbitration process must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
Impartiality
Editors should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, citizenship, or the political philosophy of the authors.
Investigation of Claims
An editor who finds convincing evidence of an ethical violation should contact the Editorial Board and the Publisher to have the article corrected, retracted, or other corrections made.
Conflict of Interest
The editor should not be involved in decisions about articles written by him or his family members. In addition, such work should be subject to all the usual procedures of the journal. The editor should follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines regarding disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers.
Publication Decision
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published by examining the reviewer reports. The editor must comply with the policies determined by the Editorial Board.
Journal Citation Request
The editor should not attempt to influence the ranking of the journal by artificially increasing any journal metric. The editor will not request a reference to the articles of his own journal or another journal, except for scientific reasons.
Correction, Withdrawal, Publication of Concern
Editors may consider issuing a correction if minor errors are detected in the published article that does not affect the findings, comments, and conclusions. Editors should consider retracting the article in case of major errors/violations that invalidate the findings and conclusions. Editors should consider issuing a statement of concern if there is evidence that the findings are unreliable and that the authors' institutions did not investigate the case if there is a possibility of abusive research or publication by the authors, or if the potential investigation seems unfair or inconclusive. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines are taken into account with regard to the correction, withdrawal, or expression of concern.
Reviewer Process Principles
Evaluation Principles
1) Articles that have not been published before or are not currently being evaluated in another journal for publication and are approved by each author are accepted for evaluation.
2) Submitted articles that pass the preliminary check are scanned for plagiarism using Turnitin or iThenticate software.
3) ISPEC Journal of Science Institute conducts a double-blind referee process. All studies will first be evaluated by the editor for suitability for the journal. Articles deemed appropriate are sent to at least two independent expert referees to evaluate the scientific quality of the article.
4) The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the articles independently of the authors' ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs and political philosophy. It ensures that articles submitted for publication are fairly evaluated by double-blind referees.
5) Chief editor; It does not allow conflict of interest among 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 articles written by themselves or their family members or colleagues, or that relate to products or services in which the editor is interested. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures.
Referees must ensure that all information regarding submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published, and if they notice any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author, they must report it to the editor.
If the referee does not feel qualified about the subject of the article or does not seem able to provide timely feedback, he/she should inform the editor of this situation and ask not to include him/her in the referee process.
During the evaluation process, the editor clearly states that the articles sent to the referees for review are the private property of the authors and that this is a privileged communication. Referees and editorial board members cannot discuss articles with other people. Care should be taken to keep the identity of the referees confidential.
Evaluation process
Judging Type: Double Blinding
Double Blinding: After the plagiarism check, the eligible articles are evaluated by the editor-in-chief in terms of originality, methodology, importance of the subject covered and compatibility with the scope of the journal. The editor ensures that the articles go through double-blind refereeing in a fair manner and, if the article complies with the formal principles, submits the incoming article to the evaluation of at least two referees from home and/or abroad, and if the referees deem it necessary, they approve its publication after the requested changes are made by the authors.
Review Time: Pre-Release
Author-Referee Interaction: Editors mediate all interactions between referees and authors.
Time in Review: The period until the first decision is approximately 20 days for research articles taken into the referee process for review in ISPEC Journal of Science Institute.
Plagiarism Check: Yes - Turnitin or iThenticate scans articles to prevent plagiarism.
Number of Referees Reviewing Each Article: Two-three
Allowed Time: 20 days. This period can be extended by adding 10 days.
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: When reviewers suspect research or publication misconduct, they must report the situation to the Editor. The editor is responsible for carrying out the necessary actions in accordance with COPE recommendations.
The Editor-in-Chief reviews the research article on the day it is submitted, and if he thinks the article is worthy of further consideration, he sends it to the deputy editor for further review. For research articles, the assistant editor usually reads each article from cover to cover. We aim to reach an initial decision within two or three weeks for all manuscripts, but usually an initial decision is made within a few days of submission. If we do no ISPEC Journal of Science Institute is the right journal for the study, we immediately notify the authors so that they can submit 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.The next step for your research article is our Editorial Board meeting. Members will read your article and discuss its importance, originality and scientific quality. To make editorial decisions for research articles, we mainly focus on the research question. Even if the subject of the article is relevant to the scope of the journal, current and important, we may reject the article if it does not have a research question. Of course, the work will be rejected if it has serious flaws. Everyone attending the article meeting is asked to declare any relevant conflicting interests at the outset, and anyone with a significant conflicting interest either leaves the room or speaks last while the relevant article is discussed (depending on the nature and extent of their interests).your article is suitable for ISPEC Journal of Science Institute, the section editor will send your article to two external referees. Reviewers make recommendations to editors, who make the final decision. We ask referees to approve their reports and declare any conflicts of interest on the article we send to them. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief after external peer review processes.
Some articles may also be viewed by the ethics editor of ISPEC Journal of Science Institute and by third parties deemed appropriate by the editor, in cases where serious research misconduct is suspected.
After submission for all articles We aim to reach a final decision on publication within 6 to 8 weeks . If we propose a publication subject to revision, we usually ask authors to revise their articles and upload them to the system within the next month.
Accepted articles are published at https://ispecscience.com/index.php/pub/issue/archive as they are prepared . Once published, articles are selected for the next issue.
ISPEC Journal of Science Institute 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, email the editor-in-chief who will let you know if corrections will be made.
Peer Review Process Principles for the Work of the Editorial Staff
Editorial articles and analysis articles written by ISPEC Journal of Science Institute own editors do not undergo external referee evaluation. Original research articles are sent to at least two external referees under blind peer review. During this period, those editors' roles are suspended.
Responsibilities of Authors
The author must comply with research and publication ethics.
The author should not attempt to publish the same work in more than one journal.
The author must fully state in the bibliography the works he used in writing the article.
Editor's Responsibilities
The editor evaluates manuscripts in terms of scientific content, regardless of the authors' ethnicity, gender, citizenship, religious belief or political opinion.
The editor conducts a fair double-blind peer review of articles submitted for publication and ensures that all information regarding submitted articles is kept confidential before publication.
The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. Referees and the editorial board cannot discuss the articles with other people. The anonymity of referees must be ensured. In certain cases, the editor may share a reviewer's review with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.
The editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication. It is also his responsibility to issue a correction note or retract when necessary.
Editor; It does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors and referees. Only the Editorial Board has full authority to appoint referees, and the Editorial Board is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of articles in the journal.
Responsibilities of Referees
Reviewers should not have any conflict of interest regarding the research, authors and/or research funders.
The referees' evaluations must be objective.
The language and style used by the referees should not be offensive to the author.
Reviewers must ensure that all information regarding submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published.
If referees notice copyright infringement or plagiarism in the work they review, they must notify the editor.
A referee who feels inadequate to review a manuscript or who thinks that he/she cannot complete the review within the specified time should withdraw from the review process.
During the referee process, referees are expected to make their evaluations by taking into account the following issues: Does the article contain new and important information? / Does the abstract clearly and neatly describe the content of the article? / Is the method described in a complete and understandable manner? / Are the interpretations and conclusions substantiated by the findings? / Are sufficient references given to other studies in the field? / Is the language quality sufficient?
Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Screening
Study; It is reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal publishing principles, academic writing rules and APA 7th Edition, and is scanned for plagiarism using the Turnitin or iThenticate program. The preliminary review is completed within 15 days at most. The plagiarism similarity rate must be less than 15%. Even though the similarity rate appears to be 4%, if citation and quotation are not made properly, plagiarism may still occur. In this respect, citation and quotation rules should be known by the author and applied carefully:
Field Editor Review
The work, which goes through the Preliminary Examination and Plagiarism Screening phase, is examined by the relevant field editor in terms of problematic and academic language-style. This review is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
Referee Process (Academic Evaluation)
The study, which is reviewed by the field editor, is submitted to the evaluation of at least two external referees who have a doctoral thesis, book or article on the subject. The arbitration process is carried out confidentially within the framework of double-blind arbitration. The referee is requested to state his/her views and opinions about the study he/she reviewed either in the text or to 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 opinions 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 study is submitted to the Editorial Board with a proposal to consider its publication. If one of the two referees has a negative opinion, the study is sent to a third referee. Studies can be published with the positive decision of at least two referees. Book and symposium evaluations and publication of doctoral thesis summaries are decided upon the evaluation of at least two internal referees (relevant field editors and/or editorial board members).
Correction Phase
If the referees request corrections in the text they review, the relevant reports are sent to the author and he is asked to correct his work. The author makes corrections in the Word program with the "Track Changes" feature turned on or indicates the changes in the text in red. He submits the corrected text to the field editor.
Field Editor Control
The field editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.
Referee Control
The referee who requests correction checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.
Turkish Language Control
The works that pass the referee process are examined by the Turkish Language Editor and the Editor-in-Chief, and if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The control process is completed within 15 days at most.
English Language Check
Studies that pass Turkish language control are examined by the English Language Editor and, if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The checking process of the English language editor is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
Editorial Board Review
Articles that pass technical, academic and linguistic reviews are examined by the Editorial Board and it is decided whether they will be published and, if so, in which issue they will be included. The Board decides by majority vote. In case of a tie, the final decision is made by the editor.
Typesetting and Layout Stage
The works decided to be published by the Editorial Board are typed and layouted, made ready for publication, and sent to the author for review. This phase lasts a maximum of 15 days.
Data Sending to National and International Indexes
The data of the published issue is transmitted to the relevant indexes within 15 days.
