In Marife Turkish Journal of Religious Studies, “Double-blind peer review method” is used in the article evaluation process. All articles submitted to Marife and found qualified in the preliminary review process are reviewed by double-blind peer review method. Double-blind peer review means the identity of both the author and reviewer is kept hidden. In accordance with this method, authors do not include any information such as name, title, or institution that would reveal their identities in their articles. The authors' names are deleted from the metadata of the files they submit. Thanks to this method, any possible referee bias or advocacy is prevented, and articles are evaluated based solely on the quality of the research. Referee opinions are the primary determinant of the publication quality of Marife Turkish Journal of Religious Studies.
All articles submitted to the journal are first subjected to a preliminary evaluation by the editorial board. The examination result is reported to the author with a report (See Article Pre-evaluation Form). During the pre-evaluation stage, articles may be rejected for reasons such as similarity with another published article, no new contribution to the literature, method or style problems, the subject of the article being outside the scope of the journal, or it contains incorrect information. The articles sent to the journal are subject to review by the relevant field editor, who is an expert in the field, and it is decided whether the relevant article will be published in the journal. Necessary corrections and improvements are made in the articles to be published.
Studies that pass the preliminary review stage are forwarded to two referees who are experts in the field determined by the field editors. The referees inform the editorial board whether they can evaluate the study or not within 15 days at the latest after the article is sent to them. If the referee does not notify within the specified time, a new referee is appointed to the study. Appointed referees cannot share any documents or details about the article they review with anyone.The time given to the referees for the referee evaluation process is 15 days. Referees can examine the revisions of work and decide whether it is appropriate or, if necessary, request corrections more than once. The reports from the two referees are combined by the field editor and transferred to the author in a way that the names of the referees remain completely confidential. When the referees request corrections, the authors make the corrections within 15 days at the latest and submit their work to the journal via the same system. The corrected work is re-evaluated by the referees who request changes or corrections when necessary. The Editorial Board decides the publication of the studies in line with the referee's opinions. In case of inconsistency in the opinions of the referees, the Editorial Board may send the study to a different referee if it deems necessary. In the article acceptance process, if the opinions of the two referees differ, a decision is made by taking the opinion of a third referee.
Submission and publication of articles are free of charge. The publication process of the accepted work takes 2-4 months from the date of receipt of the work.
Here is a list of steps required to anonymize an article for double-blind peer review:
• The article’s main file cannot contain author's name, title, or institution.
• Following info should be indicated and/or explained on the Title Page: Author and institution information, acknowledgment letter, financial support statement, conflict of interest statement, whether it is produced from a thesis/paper or not. The article should be submitted with the title page. Only the main file of the article is submitted to the referee and the identity of the author is kept confidential.
• Authors should not use expressions that would reveal their identities when citing their previous work in their articles.
• Names of the authors should remain anonymous while responding to peer-reviews during the review process. The field editors check this and personal information is removed from the article files with the Document Inspector.
Referee ReportsPeer-reviews are generally based on examining studies from the following aspects:
• Compliance with ethical rules
The referees evaluate the studies using the online "Article Evaluation Form". In addition, if the referees deem it necessary, they can send the notes stating their suggestions and opinions on the full text to the field editor.Referees can express their opinions in four ways regarding the studies:
• Cannot be published (Rejection)
Plagiarism is an author's use of another person's ideas or work as their own without attribution. Any kind of plagiarism is unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Authors must submit entirely original works, and if they have used the work or words of others, they must properly cite.
All studies submitted to the journal are scanned by the assistant editors using the iThenticate plagiarism scanning program during the pre-evaluation phase and the report is uploaded to the system. Studies with a similarity rate of more than 15% (excluding references) are not evaluated and returned to their authors. If a work published in the journal is found to be plagiarism, the Editorial Board reserves the right to take various actions, including withdrawing the article, reporting the issue to the department head, dean and/or relevant institutions in the institution where the author works.Marife Turkish Journal of Religious Studies is expected to bear the ethical responsibilities of all stakeholders within the scope of publication ethics. In this context, Marife Turkish Journal of Religious Studies undertakes to follow the Code of Conduct (Core Practices) and Application Guide (Principles of Transparency and Best Practice) prepared by COPE (Publication Ethics Committee). Following the Cope Guidance for (Cope Guidance for Editors) is within the scope of the editors' duty, and Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers (COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers) must be followed by journal referees.