Articles sent to KHM go through the following stages:
First Evaluation Phase
A study submitted to KHM is primarily evaluated by the editor(s) of the journal. Studies that do not coincide with the purpose and scope of the journal, poor in terms of academic publication language and Turkish (English / German) grammar and expression rules, that contain scientifically unacceptable errors, have no original value, and do not concordant with publication principles are directly rejected by the editor(s) of the Journal. Informative text explaining the reason for rejection are sent to the author(s) of the rejected study within one month at the latest, from the submission date of the article.
Studies approved by the KHM editor(s) at the initial evaluation stage are directed to the Field Editor to perform a detailed review of the content area of the article.
Evaluation Phase by the Field Editor
Articles that successfully complete the First Evaluation Phase are reviewed by the Field Editor. At this stage, the Field Editor examines the literature, method, findings, and conclusion Fields of the study in detail in terms of content and especially originality. The field editor checks whether the article compatible with the academic field of the relevant field, whether the academic terminology of the relevant field is used correctly, and whether the parts of the study are arranged in accordance with an academic study. The editor checks for the last time whether the study is in concordance with the Journal’s purpose and scope and the publication principles.
The author(s) of the study, which were rejected and not eligible to be submitted to the referees after the Evaluation Phase by the Field Editor, are informed with a report that explains the reason for rejection. Report reaches the author(s) within one month at the latest from the submission date of the article.
The referee evaluation process starts for the works that are claimed appropriate to be sent to the referees after the Evaluation Phase by the Field Editor. The editor directs the relevant study to 2 referees of the selected area to evaluate the study, taking into account the content of the study.
Referee Evaluation Stage
Articles that completed phases mentioned above, are directed by the Field Editor to 2 referees to be evaluated considering their areas of expertise. At this stage, the Field Editor can select referees from the Journal’s referee pool or suggest new referees suitable for the field of the concerned study.
When referees agree that they will evaluate the articles submitted to them for evaluation, they undertake to evaluate the study within the defined frame of time and submit the evaluation reports of the study. In addition, the referee who accepts to evaluate a study undertakes that they will ethically evaluate the content of the study, the information and documents related to the study within the confidentiality rules and that they guarantee that they will not share any process related to the study.
Referee Reports
The Referee Evaluation Phase is completed when the referee creates the evaluation report. The referee completes the evaluation of the article by filling out the Journal’s Referee Evaluation Form.
The KHM Referee Evaluation Form indicates that the study from the referee, the originality of the summary, the suitability of the abstract, the suitability of the selected method, the correct presentation of the findings, the results and the discussion are sufficient; the figures, tables and tables used in the study are prepared in accordance with scientific rules, the resources are relevant and sufficient; and asks him to evaluate that it is sufficient. The referee also evaluates that the study was generally constructed in accordance with the scientific study rules, that the article was written with a good use of the terminology, the writing of the article is scientific, and it complies with the language writing rules.
During the General Evaluation Result of the Study and the Decision stage, the referee declares the General Evaluation Result of the Study and his decision regarding the publication of the Study. The decision options for the referee are as follows:
- ACCEPTANCE: Can be published as is.
- CORRECTION: It can be published by making a correction (checking by the Editorial Board is sufficient).
- FIX: I would like to review the manuscript again.
- REJECTION: Not suitable for publication.
In addition, it is a must for the referees to write their opinions about the study in the “Note to the Author” Field to be communicated to the authors.
The Field Editor may ask the author(s) to make corrections in their publication in accordance with the opinions of the referees who have evaluated the publication. The authors are expected to rearrange their works in line with these corrections from the referees. The final decision on the study to be published is made by the Editorial Board.
The author(s) can make an objection stating that they show explanatory evidence against the review opinions of the referees. The objections to be made will be evaluated by the Editorial Board and if claimed necessary, different referee opinions can be applied for the submitted publication.
Referee Evaluation Process
Referee assignments for the article are made by the Field Editor. The referee must reply within 7 days whether he/she will review the related study or not. The referee invitation can be extended for a maximum of 3 days (maximum 10 days in total). After the referee accepts the invitation, for the evaluation of the relevant work, based on the date on acceptance of the invitation, the referees are granted for maximum 30 days. The Field Editor can give a maximum of 7 days of postponement for the referee to complete the evaluation.
If the referees do not evaluate the work within a reasonable time, the Field Editor may send the related study to different referees for evaluation.
Completing the Evaluation of the Study
The Field Editor completes the evaluation of the study within 2 weeks, considering the KHM Referee Evaluation Form filled out by the referees, the General Evaluation Result of the Study and the decision of the referees for the publication of the Study.
If the referees’ reports are for 1 acceptance and 1 rejection, the Field Editor sends the study to a third referee. The Field Editor sends the final decision on the study to the editor(s).
Editorial Board Decision
Editor(s) form the opinion of the Editorial Board about the study, based on the opinions of the Field Editor and the referee. Field Editor’s opinion and referee opinions are submitted to the author(s) within a week at the latest.
Plagiarism Control Software Report
For the study accepted for publication, Kırıkkale Law Journal requests authors to submit a plagiarism report using a widely accepted plagiarism software to prevent plagiarism. Authors should avoid plagiarism. Plagiarism – is the republishing of all or part of a previously published publication (this may be the author’s own publication before) without reference to the source and republishing it like a new publication – is at the top of the scientific ethical problems.
Total Duration of the Evaluation Process
The process of evaluating a study by the Journal takes approximately 1-1.5 months. However, work steps that take place outside of the period such as sending the work to the third referee, requesting a correction from the author(s) are not included in period of this 1.5-months.