{"id":74,"date":"2020-11-17T18:13:13","date_gmt":"2020-11-17T15:13:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/energytr.com.tr\/?page_id=74"},"modified":"2026-01-30T23:27:28","modified_gmt":"2026-01-30T20:27:28","slug":"notes-for-reviewers","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/kemaltahircalismalari.com\/en\/notes-for-reviewers\/","title":{"rendered":"Notes For Reviewers"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><strong>About the Journal<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Kemal Tahir Studies began publication in 2026 by &#8220;Kafademi Scientific Research and Development Cooperative.&#8221;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Kemal Tahir Studies is an international, peer-reviewed journal published twice a year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The journal is prepared by an independent editorial team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Publication Principles<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Submissions to Kemal Tahir Studies should:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Be prepared in relation to the journal&#8217;s subject matter.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Comprehensively evaluate the recent literature in the field.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Evaluation and Publication Process for Submitted Manuscripts<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Field Editor Evaluation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>All submissions sent for evaluation are first reviewed by the editor-in-chief and then by field editors in terms of purpose, subject, content, presentation style, and compliance with writing guidelines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Only submissions that meet the preliminary evaluation criteria are sent to reviewers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Editors may seek expert opinions (anonymous readers) regarding a submission before peer review when necessary. Editors may also base their decisions on such expert opinions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Peer Review Process<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Submissions that have completed the editor-in-chief and field editor preliminary evaluation are sent to two reviewers from the relevant field. If there is a disagreement in the reviewer evaluations, a third reviewer is consulted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Reviewers are expected to provide their opinions in a detailed, clear, and scholarly manner on matters both included and not included in the evaluation form in the Novipress system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Transparency<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>All correspondence between authors and editors at Kemal Tahir Studies is conducted transparently. However, communication and correspondence between editors and reviewers are not shared with authors. Reviewer names are never included in the reports sent to authors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If a reviewer believes there are ethical issues, data integrity problems, or academic conflicts regarding the submission, they must share these concerns with the editors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In addition to a comprehensive and consistent evaluation process, editors may ask reviewers to provide suggestions on each other&#8217;s reports in order to better contribute to the author academically. In this case, reviewers&#8217; names are not disclosed to each other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Reviewer Selection<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Many factors play a role in reviewer selection. Experience, suitability of the research area, and editors&#8217; previous experiences with the reviewer are the most determining factors in reviewer selection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Authors may request that their submission not be sent to certain reviewers due to conflicts of interest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The reviewer list is periodically evaluated and renewed by the editorial team with each issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>What Should a Reviewer Do Upon Receiving a Submission?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The reviewer should first check the email sent to them and ensure they can access the Novipress system without problems by clicking the link provided in the email.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The reviewer should respond to the review invitation sent via email, taking into account the evaluation period specified for the submission and the suitability of the subject to their expertise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If the reviewer believes they cannot act fairly due to a conflict of interest (author, institution, funder, etc.), they should inform the editors that they cannot evaluate the submission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The reviewer should carefully read the Editor&#8217;s Letter sent to them, as the editor may have a specific request (such as asking to evaluate only the methodology section of the submission).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If the reviewer received assistance from someone else while evaluating the submission, they are requested to inform the editor of this person&#8217;s name. The journal editorial team considers it ethical for this person&#8217;s name to also be listed as a reviewer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Writing the Report<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>When conducting their evaluation, reviewers should focus particularly on the following questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Does the study make an original contribution to the knowledge in the field?<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Is the study scientifically current?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Reviewer evaluations are expected to be critical and impartial.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Reviewers are expected to conduct only a text-centered evaluation and avoid statements about the author&#8217;s\/authors&#8217; inadequacies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Reviewers are expected not to merely mark the ratings on the evaluation form but to elaborate on their negative opinions and state their reasons. Reviewers who provide negative opinions should particularly present the weaknesses of the study and the reasons for rejection through their evaluations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The editor intervenes in spelling errors, statements that deem the author\/authors inadequate, rude or insulting expressions, and factual errors in reviewer reports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Timeframe<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Reviewers are given 30 days to evaluate a submission.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If the reviewer cannot evaluate the submission within this period, they may request additional time from the editor or inform the editor that they cannot evaluate the submission due to time constraints. This prevents time loss for the author and provides the editor with sufficient time to assign a new reviewer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Conflict of Interest<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Authors may request that certain individuals not serve as reviewers due to conflicts of interest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Additionally, the editor does not send submissions for evaluation to reviewers in the following situations:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Reviewers with whom the author(s) have previously published joint work<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Reviewers who have assisted in preliminary readings of the author&#8217;s\/authors&#8217; work<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Reviewers known to have had issues with the author(s) previously<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Reviewers who would financially benefit from the publication of the submission<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Reviewers who work at the same institution as the author (in the same department at universities)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Since it is not possible for the editor to be aware of all the mentioned factors, reviewers are expected to inform the editor of any situations that would prevent them from conducting a fair evaluation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Publication Policy and Ethical Issues<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>No matter how much effort an editor puts into a submission, they may not notice violations of publication policy or ethical issues. It is very important for expert reviewers to alert the editor when they encounter such situations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Feedback to Reviewers<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The final version of a submission that has been accepted for publication is sent only to reviewers who wish to see the work again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>A reviewer may see that their opinions were not fully reflected in a submission after it is published. It is possible that other reviewers had different opinions and that the editor took these opinions into account. In this case, at the request of the reviewer who evaluated the submission, the opinions of other reviewers may be sent to them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Based on the reviewers&#8217; recommendations, the editor follows one of the following paths:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Accept the submission for publication with requests for partial or significant changes.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Ask the author(s) to revise their submission in accordance with reviewer opinions and initiate a new evaluation process.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Reject the submission.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Reviewers may express a definitive opinion regarding the publication or non-publication of a submission in their reports. However, editors will make a decision based on the opposing views of the reviewers who evaluated the submission. In this regard, editors do not look at the number of reviewers who accept or reject, but at the strength of the arguments of the reviewers or authors. Editors take into account reports containing strong, well-reasoned propositions rather than reports where questions in the evaluation form are simply answered with yes or no.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>About the Journal Kemal Tahir Studies began publication in 2026 by &#8220;Kafademi Scientific Research and Development Cooperative.&#8221; Kemal Tahir Studies is an international, peer-reviewed journal published twice a year. The journal is prepared by an independent editorial team. Publication Principles Submissions to Kemal Tahir Studies should: Evaluation and Publication Process for Submitted Manuscripts Field Editor [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-74","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kemaltahircalismalari.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/74","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kemaltahircalismalari.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kemaltahircalismalari.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kemaltahircalismalari.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kemaltahircalismalari.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=74"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/kemaltahircalismalari.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/74\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1383,"href":"https:\/\/kemaltahircalismalari.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/74\/revisions\/1383"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kemaltahircalismalari.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}