Peer-review Process

Peer-review Process
Review Type: Double Blind
Double-Blinding: After the plagiarism check, eligible manuscripts are evaluated by the editor in terms of originality, methodology, importance of the subject matter and suitability for the scope of the journal. After the editorial review, the work is also reviewed by the field editor. If both reviews are found appropriate, the reviewer process is initiated. The editor ensures that the manuscript goes through a fair double-blind review process and if the manuscript meets the format requirements, it is submitted to the review of at least two referees from Turkey and/or abroad, and if the editor deems necessary, it is also submitted to the third referee. The referees approve the publication of the manuscript after the changes requested by the authors are made. Finally, the field editor, language editor and journal editors review the manuscripts again. If all the reviews after the corrections are found to be appropriate, the publication process of the article is planned. 

Author-Reviewer Interactions: Editors mediate all interactions between reviewers and authors.
Average Review Time: 6-8 Weeks
Similarity Check: Yes-Articles are scanned with iThenticate&Turnitin to prevent plagiarism.
Number of Reviewers Reviewing Each Article: Two-Three
Decision: In order for the article to be accepted for publication by the Editor, at least two reviewers must make an acceptance decision.
Suspicion of Ethical Violation: Reviewers should inform the Editor if there is a suspicion of misconduct in the research or publication. The Editor is responsible for taking necessary actions in line with COPE recommendations.
The Editor reviews the research article and, if he/she thinks that the article is worthy of further consideration, sends it to the Deputy Editor for further review. For research articles, the Associate Editor usually reads each article thoroughly. We aim to reach an initial decision for all manuscripts within two or three weeks, but usually the initial decision is made within a few days of submission. If we do not feel that the International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research is the right journal for the work, we will inform the authors immediately so that they can submit their work elsewhere without delay. The usual reasons for rejection at this stage are insufficient originality and the topic being outside the scope of the journal.
If your article is suitable for the International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, the editor will send your article to two external referees. The referees make recommendations to the editors who will make the final decision. We ask the referees to approve their reports and to declare any conflict of interest on the manuscripts we submit. The final decision is made by the editor after the external peer review process.
In cases where serious research misconduct is suspected, some manuscripts may also be reviewed by the ethics editor of the International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research and third parties deemed appropriate by the editor.
For all manuscripts, we aim to reach a final decision on publication within 2 weeks of submission. When we propose a publication subject to revision, we usually ask the authors to revise their articles and upload them to the system.
International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research provides open access to articles as part of its commitment to readers and authors. All our articles are freely accessible online.
If you notice any errors in your published article, you can send an e-mail to the Editor. The Editor will let you know whether the correction will be made.
Review Process Principles Regarding the Work of the Editorial Team
If the members of our journal boards publish an article in our journal, all duties in the relevant issue are suspended. Their access to the system is suspended. Violation of the blind refereeing system is not permitted in any way. Such publications cannot exceed 1/4 of the total number of articles in the issue.

Update: 03.09.2024