Reviewer Guideline
Review Process: Double-blind peer review
1. Introduction
This guideline is prepared for reviewers invited to participate in the review process by RATS. Your meticulous and impartial evaluations play a critical role in ensuring the publication quality of our journal. Conducting the review process adhering to scientific and ethical standards is essential for contributing to our journal's knowledge base and strengthening the scientific literature.
2. Role and Responsibilities of Reviewers
As a reviewer, you have taken on an important task in the scientific publishing world. Your evaluation will provide valuable insights to our journal editors regarding the manuscript's publishability and scientific contribution. Your assessments should be made within the principles of impartiality and objectivity.
3. Review Process
The manuscript review process consists of the following steps:
a. Review Invitation: When you receive a review invitation for a manuscript, you are expected to decide whether to accept or decline the assignment. If you accept the assignment, the start and submission deadline of the review process will be communicated to you.
b. Manuscript Evaluation: While reviewing the manuscript, please consider the following main criteria, in line with the publication policies of our journal:
- Innovation and Scientific Contribution: Ensure that the manuscript presents an original and novel scientific contribution.
- Methodology and Data: Evaluate the research methods and data analysis for accuracy and reliability.
- Consistency of Results: The manuscript's conclusions should align with the proposed hypotheses and remain consistent.
- Writing and Formatting: Assess the manuscript's readability, language usage, and accuracy of references.
4. Ethical Considerations
During the evaluation of manuscripts, please ensure the preservation of ethical standards. Pay attention to the following ethical issues:
- Scientific Integrity: Make sure that the manuscript's data and results are not manipulated.
- Conflict of Interest: Declare any existing conflict of interest related to the manuscript.
- Plagiarism: Verify that proper citations are made if the manuscript includes any content from other sources.
- Data Fabrication: Ensure that the data presented in the manuscript is not falsified or misleading.
5. Review Report
After evaluating the manuscript, you are expected to prepare a review report in the following format:
- Provide a clear overall evaluation and acceptability of the manuscript.
- Offer detailed feedback on any existing deficiencies and suggestions for improvement.
- Clearly state any observed ethical violations or conflict of interest.
- Highlight the positive and negative aspects noticed during the review process.
6. Post-Review Decisions
Once you complete your review report, you are required to communicate your opinion about the manuscript to the journal editors. Possible decisions based on the review are as follows:
- Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted without revisions.
- Revision Request: Authors are asked to address specific issues in the manuscript and submit a revised version for reconsideration.
- Reevaluation: The manuscript is reevaluated after addressing major concerns.
- Rejection: The manuscript is deemed unsuitable for publication.
7. Contact Information
If you have any questions, concerns, or need to communicate with the journal editors, please do not hesitate to contact them. The contact information is provided below:
Mustafa Makav - editor@ratsjournal.com
8. Acknowledgment and Motivation
Lastly, we extend our gratitude to you for reading this guideline and accepting the valuable task of contributing to the peer review process. Our journal aims to support and advance your scientific community by promoting interdisciplinary research and emphasizing the sharing of quality scientific content. Your dedicated time spent on conducting reviews and utilizing this guideline will greatly contribute to achieving our journal's objectives.
We eagerly look forward to your evaluations, which will enhance the quality of scientific research, foster innovative studies, and expand the pool of knowledge. Thank you once again for your valuable contributions, and we hope to establish a long-lasting collaboration with our esteemed reviewers.
9. Review Process Timeline
The timeline for the manuscript review process will be communicated to you by the journal editors. Generally, the duration for completing the review process may vary based on the complexity and length of the manuscript. We kindly request that you endeavor to complete the process in a timely manner to contribute to the journal's publication process.
10. Conflict of Interest Declaration
For each manuscript you review, it is expected that you disclose the presence of any conflict of interest. Conflict of interest may involve financial, personal, academic, or other relevant relationships. If you have any conflict of interest in evaluating the manuscript, please clearly state it to the journal editors. This declaration enhances the transparency of our publication process and ensures the impartial evaluation of manuscripts.
11. Appreciation and Motivation
Finally, we extend our gratitude to you for accepting this valuable responsibility and for your contributions. Our journal endeavors to be a platform that supports your scientific community, fosters interdisciplinary research, and values the sharing of high-quality scientific content. Your expertise and dedication to conducting reviews, adhering to accuracy and honesty principles, will significantly contribute to our scientific community.
If you have any questions or require any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact the journal editors. Once again, thank you for your invaluable contributions, and we look forward to establishing a long and productive collaboration with our esteemed reviewers.
