- Manuscripts that have not been previously published or are not currently under review for publication in another journal are accepted for consideration, subject to the approval of each author.
- Submitted and pre-reviewed manuscripts are scanned for plagiarism using Ithenticate software.
- Nigarhane Journal uses a double-blind review process. All manuscripts are first evaluated by the editor for suitability for the journal. Eligible articles are sent to at least two independent peer reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the article.
- The Editor-in-Chief evaluates manuscripts independently of the authors' ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs, and political philosophy. He/she will ensure that manuscripts submitted for publication are subjected to fair double-blind peer review.
- The Editor-in-Chief does not allow conflicts of interest between authors, editors, and reviewers.
- The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision on acceptance or rejection of manuscripts. The Editor-in-Chief's decision is final.
- Editors are not involved in decisions about manuscripts written by themselves, family members, or colleagues, or about products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all the normal procedures of the journal.
Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published and should report to the Editor if they become aware of any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author.
If the reviewer does not feel qualified to review the manuscript or is unlikely to be able to provide timely feedback, he/she should inform the editor and ask the editor not to involve the reviewer in the review process.
During the review process, the editor should make it clear to reviewers that manuscripts submitted for review are the private property of the authors and that this is a privileged communication. Reviewers and editorial board members should not discuss articles with other individuals. Care should be taken to keep the identity of reviewers confidential.
Review Process
Reviewer Type: Double Blind
Double blind: After plagiarism checking, eligible manuscripts are evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief for originality, methodology, importance of the topic covered, and compatibility with the scope of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief ensures that the manuscripts undergo a fair double-blind refereeing process, and if the manuscript meets the formal requirements, the Editor-in-Chief submits the manuscript to the evaluation of at least two referees from Turkey and/or abroad, and if the referees deem it necessary, they approve the manuscript for publication after the requested changes are made by the authors.
Pre-publication review time
Author-Reviewer Interactions: Editors mediate all interactions between reviewers and authors.
Review time: In Nigarhane Journal, the time to first decision was approximately 15 days for research articles received for review in the referee process.
Acceptance Rate: We publish about 66.07% of the articles received by our journal. Approximately one-fifth of all submissions are rejected at the preliminary review stage before being sent for peer review.
Plagiarism check: Yes -Ithenticate scans articles to prevent plagiarism.
Number of reviewers reviewing each article: Two to three
Allowable duration: 20 days. This period can be extended by an additional 10 days.
Decision: In order for the article to be accepted for publication by the editor, at least two reviewers must make an acceptance decision.
Suspected Ethical Violations: Reviewers should inform the Editor if they suspect misconduct in the research or publication. The Editor is responsible for taking appropriate action in accordance with COPE recommendations.
The submitted research article is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief on the same day. If the article is deemed worthy of further consideration, it is sent to the Deputy Editor for a more detailed review. The Deputy Editor typically reads each research article in its entirety. Our goal is to make an initial decision on all manuscripts within two to three weeks, although the initial decision is usually made within a few days of submission. If the Nigarhane Journal is not deemed suitable for the work, the authors will be promptly notified so that they can submit their work elsewhere. The most common reasons for rejection at this stage are lack of originality and the topic being outside the scope of the journal.
The next step for your research paper is our Editorial Board meeting, during which the members will review your paper and evaluate its significance, originality, and scientific quality. When making editorial decisions for research articles, our main focus is on the research question. Even if the article's topic is relevant, topical, and important to the journal's scope, we may reject it if it lacks a research question. Additionally, papers with serious flaws will be rejected. Attendees of the article meeting are required to disclose any relevant conflicting interests at the beginning of the meeting. Individuals with significant conflicting interests must either leave the room or speak last, depending on the nature and extent of their interest, while the article is being discussed.
If the article is deemed suitable for publication in the Nigarhane Journal, the section editor will send it to two external referees for review. The referees will provide feedback to the editors, who will make the final decision. Referees are requested to confirm their reports and disclose any conflicts of interest regarding the article they receive. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision after external peer review processes.
In cases of suspected serious research misconduct, some articles may also be reviewed by the ethics editor of Nigarhane Journal and third parties deemed appropriate by the editor.
Nigarhane Journal is committed to providing open access to articles. All of our articles are available online at no cost.
If you identify any errors in your published article, please contact the editor-in-chief, who will determine if a correction is necessary.
The Review Process for the Work of the Editorial Staff at Nigarhane Journal follows certain principles
Editorials and analysis articles written by the journal's own editors are not subject to external refereeing. Original research articles, on the other hand, are sent for blind review to at least two external reviewers. During this period, the roles of those editors are suspended.
Author Responsibilities
Authors must comply with research and publication guidelines.
They should not attempt to publish the same work in more than one journal.
Works used in the writing of the article should be indicated in the bibliography.
Editor's Responsibilities
The editor is responsible for evaluating manuscripts for scientific content without regard to the ethnicity, gender, citizenship, religious beliefs, or political opinions of the authors.
Additionally, the editor conducts a fair double-blind peer review of manuscripts submitted for publication and ensures that all information about submitted manuscripts is kept confidential before publication.
It is the editor's responsibility to inform the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential and that this is a privileged interaction. Reviewers and the editorial board must not discuss manuscripts with anyone else to ensure the anonymity of reviewers. 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. The editor is responsible for issuing correction notes or retractions when necessary
and ensuring there is no conflict of interest between authors, editors, and reviewers. They have the authority to appoint referees, but the Editorial Board makes the final decision regarding manuscript publication in the journal.
Responsibilities of Reviewers
Reviewers should not have any conflicts of interest related to the research, the authors and/or the research funders.
Reviewers' evaluations should be objective.
The language and style used by the referees should not offend the author.
Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published.
Reviewers should inform the editor if they detect any instances of copyright infringement or plagiarism in the reviewed work.
If a reviewer feels inadequate to review a manuscript or cannot complete the review within the specified timeframe, they should withdraw from the review process.
During the review process, reviewers are expected to consider the following points: It is important to consider whether the article presents new and significant information, if the abstract accurately and clearly describes the article's content, if the methodology is presented in a coherent and comprehensible manner, if the interpretations and conclusions are supported by the findings, if there are enough references to other studies in the field, and if the language quality is appropriate.
The Nigarhane Journal website provides access to the 'Preliminary Review Form', 'Article Evaluation Form', and 'Book Review Evaluation Form'.
Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Check
The manuscript undergoes a preliminary review and plagiarism check to ensure compliance with the journal's editorial guidelines, academic writing rules, and APA Citation System. The manuscript undergoes a preliminary review and plagiarism check to ensure compliance with the journal's editorial guidelines, academic writing rules, and APA Citation System. The iThenticate program is used to scan for plagiarism, and the review is completed within 15 days. The plagiarism similarity rate must be less than 15%. It is important to note that even if the similarity rate appears to be 1%, proper citation and quotation must be ensured to avoid plagiarism. In regards to citation and quotation rules, it is important for the author to have a thorough understanding and carefully apply them.
Citation/Indirect Transference: When citing an opinion, discussion, or determination from a source, use a footnote sign (1) at the end of the sentence if the cited opinion is presented in the researcher's own words. If the citation refers to a specific page or page range, include the page number.If a reference is made in a dimension that requires the reader to examine the entire work, the source should be indicated in the footnote after the phrase 'bk. on this subject', 'bk. about this opinion', 'bk. about this discussion', or just 'bk.' to ensure clarity and accuracy.
Quote/Citation: When quoting directly from the source, use double quotation marks to indicate the exact wording without any alterations. Include the footnote number at the end to indicate the source. Quotations within the quoted text should be written using single quotation marks. If the quoted text is longer than three lines or forty words, it should be shown in a separate paragraph.To distinguish long quotations from the main text, it is preferred to use a font size one smaller than the normal text size and to indent the entire paragraph from the left at the beginning of the line. Direct quotations may omit some words, sentences, or paragraphs as long as they do not alter the meaning. Use ellipses (...) to indicate omitted parts. It is incorrect to quote a part of a source verbatim without enclosing it in double quotation marks and providing the source at the end. Failure to follow these rules may result in accusations of violating publication ethics, such as plagiarism (see www.isnadsistemi.org).
Section Editor Review
The manuscript that passes the Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Scanning stage undergoes a Field Editor Review. This review is conducted by the relevant field editor and focuses on problematic and academic language and style. The review process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
Reviewer Process for Academic Evaluation:
Following review by the field editor, the manuscript is submitted to at least two external referees who hold a PhD in the relevant subject area and have published a thesis, book, or article on the topic. The review process is conducted confidentially through double-blind refereeing. Reviewers are asked to provide their opinion and feedback on the manuscript, or to justify their opinion with a minimum 150-word explanation on the online reviewer form. The author has the right to object and defend their views if they disagree with the reviewer's opinions. The field editor ensures mutual communication between the author and the reviewer while maintaining confidentiality. If both reviewer reports are positive, the manuscript is submitted to the Editorial Board with a proposal for publication. If one of the two referees has a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer. Publications require approval from at least two reviewers. Book and symposium reviews, as well as doctoral thesis abstracts, are evaluated by a minimum of two internal reviewers, who are relevant field editors and/or members of the editorial board.
Correction Phase
If the reviewers require corrections to the text they have reviewed, the corresponding reports are sent to the author and he/she is asked to correct his/her work. The author makes the corrections in Word with the "Track Changes" feature enabled, or highlights the changes in red in the text. The author submits the corrected text to the field editor.
Section Editor Control
The section editor checks that the author has made the requested corrections to the text.
Reviewer Check
The reviewer checks whether the author has made the requested corrections to the text.
Extending the abstract and abstract section
Authors of manuscripts deemed "publishable" by both reviewers will be asked to expand the abstract/abstract section of the manuscript to 250-350 words.
Turkish language review
The manuscripts that pass the peer review process will be reviewed by the Turkish Language Editor and the Editor-in-Chief, and if necessary, the author will be asked to proofread the manuscript. The review process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
English Language Control
Manuscripts that pass the Turkish language check are reviewed by the English language editor and, if necessary, the author is asked to make revisions. The review process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
Editorial Board Review
Articles that pass the technical, scientific, and linguistic reviews are reviewed by the Editorial Board, which decides whether or not to publish them and, if so, in which issue. The Board decides by majority vote. In the event of a tie, the Editor's decision is final.
Typesetting and layout phase
Manuscripts accepted for publication by the Editorial Board are typeset and edited, made ready for publication, and sent to the author for review. This phase takes a maximum of 15 days.
Submission of data to national and international indexes
The data of the published issue is sent to the relevant indexes within 15 days.
