Reviewer Guideline

Reviewer Guidelines

Considering that the ISPEC International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences aims to publish original and significant manuscripts, we ask reviewers to assist us in the evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

Below, information is provided on the manuscript evaluation process, how to become a reviewer, and how to write a high-quality review. In addition, our reviewer terms and conditions, based on the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which provide further guidance on conducting objective and constructive peer review, are presented.

The ISPEC International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences adopts a double-blind peer review model.

Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are selected from among experts who hold a doctoral degree in the relevant field of the manuscript and have published scientific work. Information on experts working at Turkish universities is obtained through the YOK Academic website (https://akademik.yok.gov.tr/AkademikArama/), while information on international experts is accessed via Publons.

Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any potential personal bias and take this into consideration when reviewing a manuscript. Reviewers must clearly express their evaluations that support their recommendations.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and provides authors with an opportunity to improve their manuscripts. Reviewers who feel unqualified to review a manuscript or who believe they cannot complete the review within the required time should decline the review invitation.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to the journal for review must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not share information about the manuscript or communicate directly with the authors. Information obtained during peer review may not be used in the reviewer’s own research without the author’s explicit written permission. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Sensitivity to Research and Publication Ethics Violations

Reviewers should be vigilant regarding potential ethical issues in manuscripts and report any concerns to the editor.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must not accept review assignments for manuscripts in which they have potential conflicts of interest arising from relationships with the authors or affiliated institutions.

Requests for Citation

If a reviewer suggests that an author cite the reviewer’s own work (or that of their collaborators), such a recommendation must be based on genuine scholarly reasons, not on the intent to increase citation counts or visibility.
(See also: Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers.)

Conducting the Review

Reviews must be objective. During the review process, reviewers are expected to consider the following questions:

  • Does the manuscript present new and significant information?

  • Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the manuscript?

  • Are the methods described in a coherent and understandable manner?

  • Are the interpretations and conclusions supported by the findings?

  • Are sufficient references provided to relevant studies in the field?

  • Is the language quality adequate?

  • Do the abstract and keywords accurately reflect the content of the manuscript?

Editor Guidelines

Selection of Editors

Editors are selected from among experts who hold a doctoral degree and have publications relevant to the journal’s scope.

Türkiye Editors’ Workshop Group

The ISPEC International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences encourages editors to remain in contact with other editors for professional development. Our editors are members of the Türkiye Editors’ Workshop Group.

Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

Coordination of the Peer Review Process

Editors must ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial, and timely. Research articles must be reviewed by at least two external reviewers, and additional opinions may be sought when necessary.

Selection of Reviewers

Editors select reviewers with appropriate expertise, taking into account inclusivity and diversity. Best practices are followed to avoid fraudulent or inappropriate reviewers.

Maintaining Confidentiality

Editors must ensure the confidentiality of all submitted materials and all communications with reviewers unless otherwise agreed. In exceptional cases and in consultation with the publisher, editors may share limited information with editors of other journals to investigate suspected research misconduct. Editors must protect reviewer identities. Information contained in submitted manuscripts may not be used in editors’ own research without written permission from the author. Privileged information obtained during the peer review process must not be used for personal benefit.

Impartiality

Editors must evaluate manuscripts based solely on their intellectual content, without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Investigation of Allegations

Editors who identify convincing evidence of ethical violations must contact the Editorial Board and the Publisher to ensure appropriate actions such as corrections, retractions, or other remedies.

Conflict of Interest

Editors must not participate in decisions regarding manuscripts authored by themselves or their family members. Such submissions are subject to the journal’s standard procedures. Editors must follow COPE guidelines regarding the disclosure of conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers.

Publication Decisions

Editors are responsible for deciding which manuscripts are accepted for publication based on reviewer reports and in accordance with the policies of the Editorial Board.

Requests for Journal Citations

Editors must not attempt to influence journal rankings by artificially increasing citation metrics. Editors must not request citations to their own journal or other journals for non-scientific reasons.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

Editors may publish corrections for minor errors that do not affect the findings, interpretations, or conclusions. Retractions should be considered in cases of major errors or misconduct that invalidate the findings. Expressions of concern may be issued when there is evidence that findings are unreliable and investigations are inconclusive or unjustified. All actions follow COPE guidelines.

Peer Review Process Principles

Evaluation Principles

  1. Only manuscripts that have not been previously published or submitted elsewhere and have been approved by all authors are considered.

  2. Manuscripts that pass the preliminary review are screened for plagiarism using Turnitin or iThenticate.

  3. The journal applies a double-blind peer review process. All submissions are initially evaluated by the editor for suitability. Manuscripts deemed appropriate are sent to at least two independent expert reviewers.

  4. The Editor-in-Chief evaluates manuscripts independently of authors’ ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, or political philosophy.

  5. Conflicts of interest among authors, editors, and reviewers are not permitted.

  6. The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection.

  7. Editors do not participate in decisions concerning manuscripts authored by themselves, their family members, or close colleagues.

Reviewers must keep all information confidential until publication and report any suspected copyright infringement or plagiarism to the editor. Reviewers who feel unqualified or unable to complete the review on time must notify the editor and withdraw from the process.

Review Process

  • Review Type: Double-blind

  • Review Stage: Pre-publication

  • Time to First Decision: Approximately 20 days

  • Plagiarism Check: Yes (Turnitin or iThenticate)

  • Number of Reviewers: Two to three

  • Review Period: 20 days (extendable by 10 days)

  • Decision Requirement: At least two positive reviewer reports

  • Ethical Concerns: Reported to the editor, who follows COPE recommendations

The Editor-in-Chief conducts an initial assessment upon submission. Manuscripts deemed suitable are forwarded for further editorial and external review. Final publication decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief following external peer review.

Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Screening

Manuscripts are reviewed for compliance with journal policies, academic writing standards, and APA 7th Edition. The plagiarism similarity rate must be below 15%. Even if the similarity rate is low, improper citation may still constitute plagiarism.

Language Review, Layout, and Publication

  • Turkish and English language checks are conducted separately.

  • Accepted manuscripts undergo typesetting and layout preparation.

  • Published issue data are submitted to national and international indexes within 15 days.

  • The journal provides open access, and all articles are freely available online.