Pre-Evaluation Process
Manuscripts submitted to EDEAd are first directed to the assistant editor. The assistant editor may decide to return or reject a manuscript under the following circumstances:
-
The maximum number of articles for the current issue has already been reached.
-
The same author has submitted a second manuscript.
-
The manuscript is not relevant in terms of scope.
Following this step, the manuscript is forwarded to the Publication Standards and Ethics Editor to assess its compliance with the journal's publication policy, scope, and originality. At this stage, the following are also reviewed:
-
The similarity report must not exceed 15%.
-
If necessary, the ethics committee approval must be provided.
-
A signed copyright transfer form must be included.
Minor language corrections are made by the assistant editor and Turkish language editors, whereas major corrections are requested from the author. If the manuscript does not comply with basic principles, it will be rejected. For accepted manuscripts, any identifying information such as the author’s name or institution is removed and the article is transferred to the editor.
Section Editor Review
Manuscripts that successfully pass the pre-evaluation stage are sent by the assistant editor to a section editor. The section editor reviews the manuscript and assigns two reviewers from the editorial board if the topic matches an editor's area of expertise. Otherwise, reviewers may be selected from outside the board.
Peer Review Process
The section editor has 10 days to assign reviewers. Once a reviewer accepts the invitation, they are given 20 days to complete the evaluation. If necessary, an additional 5 days may be granted. During this stage, the double-blind review policy is applied: the reviewer does not know the identity of the author, and vice versa.
Authors must submit their revisions in response to reviewer and editorial board comments within 10 days. If the author wishes to object to a reviewer’s decision, they must submit a justified report to the assistant editor.
If one of the two reviewers provides a “rejection” report, the article is either:
A negative report from the third reviewer leads to rejection, while a positive report leads to acceptance of the manuscript.
Reviewer Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:
-
Originality and relevance of the topic
-
Contribution to the field
-
Accurate use of scientific terminology
-
Whether the abstract successfully reflects the content
-
Clearly stated aim or hypothesis
-
Presence of a clear methodology or theoretical framework
-
Adequate discussion of findings and a well-grounded conclusion
-
Relevance and sufficiency of references used
Reviewers submit their decisions as one of the following:
-
Major revision
-
Minor revision
-
Reject
-
Accept
Corrections can be indicated directly on the manuscript or uploaded as a separate review report.
Publication Process
Manuscripts that successfully complete the review process are sent to the Editor-in-Chief. Once the design and layout are finalized according to EDEAd’s format, the article is uploaded to the system by the Publication Coordinator and published in the current issue.
Book Reviews
Book reviews should provide a descriptive overview of the book’s content. A critical perspective will enhance the quality of the review.
-
Reviews should not exceed five pages.
-
The preliminary evaluation is carried out by the Assistant Editor for Book Reviews.
-
If revisions are necessary, they are requested from the author.
-
The final decision is made by the Editor, and book reviews are not subject to peer review.
-
If accepted, they are published in the current issue without a DOI.