Peer Review Process

Principles of the Reviewing Process

 

Principles of Evaluation

  • Manuscripts that have not been previously published or are not currently under review for publication in another journal and have been approved by each author are accepted for evaluation.
  • Submitted and pre-checked manuscripts are scanned for plagiarism using Ithenticate or Turnitin software.
  • IJPW conducts a double-blind review process. All manuscripts will first be evaluated by the editor for suitability for the journal. Manuscripts deemed appropriate are sent to at least two independent expert referees to assess the scientific quality of the manuscript.
  • The Editor-in-Chief Chief evaluates manuscripts independently of the ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs, and political philosophy of the authors. He/she ensures that the manuscripts submitted for publication undergo a fair double-blind peer review.
  • The editor-in-chief does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors, or referees.
  • The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles. The editor's decision is final.
  • Editors are not involved in decisions about manuscripts written by themselves, family members, or colleagues, or that relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures.
    Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published and should report to the editor if they discover any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author.

Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published and should report to the editor if they discover any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author.

If the referee does not feel qualified to review the manuscript or is unlikely to be able to provide a timely response, he/she should inform the editor and ask him/her not to involve himself/herself in the review process.
During the review process, the editor makes it clear to the reviewers that the manuscripts submitted for review are the private property of the authors and that this is a privileged communication. Reviewers and editorial board members may not discuss manuscripts with other individuals. Care should be taken to keep the identities of the reviewers confidential.

 

Evaluation Process

Reviewing Type: Double Blind

Double Blinding: After the plagiarism check, eligible manuscripts are evaluated by the editor-in-chief in terms of originality, methodology, importance of the topic covered, and compatibility with the scope of the journal. The editor ensures that the manuscripts undergo double-blind refereeing in a fair manner, and if the manuscript complies with the formal principles, it is submitted to the evaluation of at least two referees from Turkey and/or abroad, and if the referees deem it necessary, they approve the publication of the manuscript after the desired changes are made by the authors.

Review Time: Pre-Publication
Author-Referee Interactions: Editors mediate all interactions between reviewers and authors.
Time in Review: It takes approximately 15 days until the first decision for research articles received in the referee process for review in the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being.
Acceptance Rate: We publish approximately 15-20% of the articles received by our journal. Approximately one-third of all submissions are rejected in the preliminary review before being sent for peer review.
Plagiarism Check: Yes, Ithenticate or Turnitin scan articles to prevent plagiarism.

Number of Reviewers Reviewing Each Article: Two-Three
Permitted Duration: 20 days This period can be extended by adding 10 days.
Decision: In order for the article to be accepted for publication by the Editor, at least two referees must make an acceptance decision.
Suspicion of Ethical Violation: Referees should inform the Editor if they suspect misconduct in the research or publication. The Editor is responsible for taking the necessary actions in accordance with COPE recommendations.

The Editor-in-Chief reviews the research article on the day of submission and, if he/she feels that the article is worthy of further consideration, sends it to the Deputy Editor for a more detailed review. For research articles, the deputy editor usually reads each article from start to finish. 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 Positivity & Well-Being is the right journal for the study, we notify 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.

The next step for your research paper is our Editorial Board meeting. The members will read your article and discuss its importance, originality, and scientific quality. To make editorial decisions for research articles, we mainly focus on the research question. Even if the topic of the article is relevant, topical, and important to the scope of the journal, we may reject the article if it does not have a research question. Of course, the manuscript will be rejected if it has serious flaws. Everyone attending the manuscript meeting is asked to declare relevant conflicting interests at the outset, and anyone with a significant conflicting interest either leaves the room or speaks last (depending on the nature and extent of their interest) while the manuscript is being discussed.

If your article is suitable for the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being, the section editor sends it to two external referees. The referees advise the editors, who make the final decision. We ask the reviewers to confirm their reports and to declare any conflicts of interest in the manuscript we send them. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief after external peer review processes.
Some manuscripts may also be reviewed by the ethics editor of the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being and third parties deemed appropriate by the editor in cases where serious research misconduct is suspected.

For all manuscripts, we aim to reach a final decision on publication within 4 to 6 weeks of submission. If we make an offer of publication subject to revision, we usually ask authors to revise and upload their manuscript within the next month.
Accepted articles are published on https://intwellbeing.com/index.php/positivity as they are prepared. After publication, articles are selected for the next issue.
The International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being 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, email the editor-in-chief, who will let you know if a correction can be made.

 

Principles of the Refereeing Process for the Work of the Editorial Staff

Editorials and analysis articles written by the editors of the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being are not subject to external peer review. Original research articles are sent to at least two external reviewers for blind review. During this period, the roles of those editors are suspended.

 

Responsibilities of Authors

The author must comply with research and publication training.

The author should not attempt to publish the same work in more than one journal.

The author should indicate the works used in the writing of the article in the bibliography.

 

Responsibilities of the Editor

The editor evaluates manuscripts for scientific content without regard to the ethnic origin, gender, citizenship, religious belief, or political opinion of the authors.
The editor conducts a fair double-blind peer review of manuscripts submitted for publication and ensures that all information about submitted manuscripts is kept confidential before publication.
The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. Reviewers and the editorial board cannot discuss manuscripts with other people. The anonymity of the referees must be ensured. In certain cases, the editor may share a reviewer's review with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.
The editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication. It is also his/her responsibility to issue a correction note or retraction when necessary.
The editor does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors or referees. He/she has full authority only to appoint referees, and the Editorial Board is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of manuscripts in the journal.

Responsibilities of the Reviewers

Reviewers should not have any conflicts of interest related to the research, the authors, or the research funders.
Reviewers' evaluations should be objective.
The language and style used by the referees should not offend the author.
Reviewers should ensure that all information regarding the submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published.
Reviewers should notify the editor if they notice copyright infringement or plagiarism in the work they review.
A reviewer who feels inadequate to review an article or who thinks that he/she cannot complete the review within the specified time should withdraw from the review process.
During the review process, referees are expected to make their evaluations by taking into account the following points: Does the article contain new and important information? / Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article? / Is the methodology described in a coherent and understandable manner? / Are the interpretations and conclusions substantiated by the findings? / Are adequate references given to other studies in the field? / Is the language quality adequate?
The "Preliminary Review Form", and "Article Evaluation Form"  used in the International Journal of Positivity & Well-Being can be examined on the journal website.

Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Scanning

The manuscript is reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal's publication principles, academic writing rules, and APA Citation System, and is scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate or Turnitin software. The preliminary review is completed within a maximum of 15 days. The plagiarism similarity rate must be less than 20%. If the similarity rate is 1% but citation and quotation are not done properly, plagiarism may still be in question. In this respect, citation and quotation rules must be known and carefully applied by the author:

 

Citation/Indirect Citation: If a citation is made to an opinion, discussion, or determination in a source and the cited opinion is put on the line with the citing researcher's own words, a footnote sign (1) should be placed at the end of the sentence. If the reference is to a certain page or page range of the work, the page number should be given. If there is a reference to the whole work, in other words, if there is a reference to a dimension that requires the reader to examine the whole work, the source should be indicated in the footnote after the phrase "see on this subject", "see about this opinion", "see about this discussion" or just "see".

Quotation/Iquotation: If the relevant part of the source is taken exactly as it is, without touching the point and comma, the quoted part is "given in double quotation marks," and the source is indicated by giving the footnote number 1 at the end. Quotations that exist in the directly quoted text are written using 'single quotation marks'. If the directly quoted part is longer than three lines (more than forty words), it is shown in a separate paragraph. In order to distinguish long quotations from the main text, it should be preferred to write in a font size one size smaller than the normal text size and to indent the entire paragraph from the left at the beginning of the line. In direct quotations, some words, sentences, and paragraphs may be omitted, provided that they do not change the meaning. Ellipses (...) are placed in place of the omitted parts. It is not correct to write the part quoted verbatim from a source without enclosing it in "double quotation marks" and to be content with just writing the source at the end. If these rules are not followed, the author may be accused of violating publication ethics (plagiarism) (see www.isnadsistemi.org).

Field Editor Review
The manuscript that passes the Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Scanning stage is examined by the relevant field editor in terms of problematic and academic language and style. This review is completed in a maximum 15 days.

Referee Process (Academic Evaluation)
After being reviewed by the field editor, the manuscript is submitted to the evaluation of at least two external referees who have a doctoral thesis, book, or article on the subject. The referee process is carried out in complete confidentiality within the framework of double-blind refereeing. The referee is requested to express his/her opinion and judgement on the manuscript either in the text or to justify it with an explanation of at least 150 words on the online referee form. If the author disagrees with the referee's opinion, he/she is given the right to object and defend his/her views. The field editor ensures mutual communication between the author and the referee while maintaining confidentiality. If both referee reports are favourable, the manuscript is submitted to the Editorial Board with a proposal for publication. If one of the two referees has a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third referee. Studies can be published with the positive decision of at least two referees. The publication of book and symposium reviews and doctoral thesis abstracts is decided upon the evaluation of at least two internal referees (relevant field editors and/or members of the editorial board).

Correction Phase
If the referees request corrections to be made in the text they have reviewed, the relevant reports are sent to the author, and the author is asked to correct his/her work. The author makes the corrections in the Word programme with the "Track Changes" feature turned on or indicates the changes in the text in red. Submits the corrected text to the field editor.

Field Editor Control
The field editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections to the text.

Reviewer Control
The reviewer checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.

English Language Check
The English Language Editor and the Editor-in-Chief review the manuscripts that make it through the referee process, and if any corrections are necessary, they ask the author to do so. The review process is completed within a maximum of 15 days.

Turkish Language Control
The manuscripts that pass the English language control are examined by the Turkish Language Editor and  Editor-in-Chief for Turkish abstract control , and, if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The control process is completed within a maximum of 7 days.

Editorial Board Review
Technical, academic, and linguistic articles are examined by the Editorial Board, and it is decided whether they will be published or not, and if so, in which issue they will be included. The board decides by majority vote. In cases of equality, the final decision is made in favour of the editor's decision.

Typesetting and Layout Phase
The Editorial Board decides which manuscripts to publish and then prepares them for publication by typesetting and layout before sending them to the author for review. This stage takes a maximum of 15 days.

Data Submission to National and International Indexes
The data for the published issue is sent to the relevant indexes within 15 days.