Peer Review Policy
Advanced Research Journal is to be a double-blind, peer-reviewed academic scientific journal. All manuscripts submitted for publication should be original. Manuscripts published or under consideration for publication elsewhere should not be submitted and will not be considered. Submission of a manuscript implies that it has not been published previously, that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, and that if accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, without the written consent of the Publisher.
Manuscripts submitted to the journal management system are reviewed by the editors within two weeks at least. The manuscripts are critically reviewed based on the journal's submission criteria:
- Aims and scope of the journal
- Quality of manuscript
- Journal writing rules (APA 7 rules)
- Publication language
- Citing and references
- Checking similarity
Manuscripts are reviewed by editors and then forwarded to two specialized reviewers. If the manuscripts do not meet the above-mentioned criteria, they are rejected by the editors.
These reviewers state their decision on whether they take the submitted manuscript into the review or not to the editorial board within two weeks at least. If the reviewers don't state an opinion to the editorial board, new reviewers are assigned to review the manuscript.
The manuscripts that pass the evaluation of the Editor(s) are sent to two experts in the field (double-blind reviewers). Persons who have or may have a direct or indirect relationship with the researcher(s) (for example, working in the same institution, etc.) are prevented from being determined as reviewers. If the reviewers have different views on the quality of the manuscript, the manuscript will be referred to a third or fourth reviewer. The manuscripts are assigned to be published if the reviewers' reports are positive. The review process may take up to 8-12 weeks for the first decision.
Reviewers' reports are kept confidential. Authors should pay attention to the criticism, suggestions, and corrections of the reviewers and the Editorial Board.
The manuscripts are sent to the reviewers using an online Reviewer Evaluation Form in accordance with the research methodology. Moreover, the assigned reviewers may also present their views and thoughts in the full paper and send it to the editorial board.
In general, peer reviews of the studies are based on originality; the method used compliance with ethical rules, consistent presentation of findings, discussion, conclusion, and literature contribution.
This review is based on the following elements:
Presentation: The reviewer report in this section should include an opinion on the general readability, organization, efficiency, focus/clarity of written expression, the creativity of expression, grammar, spelling, and punctuation, academic writing style-technique, and APA 7 format (citations in the text, references, tables…).
Introduction: The reviewer report in this section should include an opinion on the presentation and objectives of the problem addressed in the study, the importance of the subject, the scope and timeliness of the relevant literature, and the study's originality.
Method: The reviewer report in this section should include information about the suitability of the method used, the selection and characteristics of the research group, the validity and reliability of the measurement tools, and the data collection and analysis process. This section has not been taken into consideration for review/literature/opinion studies.
Results/Findings: The reviewer report in this section should include the presentation of the findings/results obtained within the framework of the method, the accuracy of the analysis, the presentation of the tables, figures, and the required visuals.
Discussion, Conclusion, & Implications: The reviewer report in this section should include the relevance of the discussion with the research questions/hypothesis(s), views on the generalizability and applicability of the findings, an opinion on the study's originality, its contribution to the literature, and practices in the field.
Reviewers' decisions serve as a guide to editors when making the final decisions. The final decision always belongs to the editors.
Reviewers can state the following four decisions for the submitted manuscript:
- Accept for Publication
- Revisions Required (Accept with minor revisions: Revisions are checked by the editors)
- Resubmit for Review (Major revisions: It will be reviewed for the second round)
- Reject (It is not recommended for publishing)
- Submit Elsewhere (It is not the scope of the journal: Reject)
In the reviewer evaluation form, the reviewers are expected to explain their views on the criteria in the form and other relevant issues in a clear, detailed, and scientific manner. Reviewer evaluation that does not contain a detailed and scientific explanation is not considered. That is, an evaluation is not regarded as valid when it is based solely on marking criteria on the form.
After reviews are completed, editors examine reviewers' comments/views for at least two weeks. Editors make the final decision for the manuscript by taking into consideration reviewers' decisions and suggestions. The final decision is sent to the author.
*Prepared by the publisher, reviewed, and approved by Advanced Research Journal Editors and commissioned Editorial Board Members. Updated on 27 June 2024.
