Referee 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 iThenticate software.
3) REPVAS journal 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. It should be ensured hidden the identity of the referees.

Evaluation process

Peer Review Process Principles for the Work of the Editorial Staff
Editorial articles and analysis articles written by REPVAS journal's 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 the rules of 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 articles 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.

Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Scanning
Study; It is reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal publishing principles, academic writing rules and APA Citation System, and is scanned for plagiarism using the iThenticate program. The preliminary review is completed within 15 days at most. The plagiarism similarity rate must be less than 20%. Even though the similarity rate appears to be 1%, 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.

Section 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 evaluation process is carried out confidentially within the framework of double-blind evaluation. 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 section editor ensures mutual communication between the author and the referee while maintaining confidentiality. If both referee reports are positive, the study is submitted for editorial evaluation. 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. The publication of congress and symposium evaluations is decided upon the evaluation of at least two internal referees (relevant section editors and/or editorial board members).
Correction Phase
If the referees want corrections to be made 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. Uploads the corrected text to the system.

Section Editor Control
The field editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.

Referee Control
The referee who requests corrections checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.

Language Check
The studies are reviewed 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 layout, 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.