Referee and Editor Guidelines
Reviewer Guide
Considering that Eregli Journal of Agricultural Sciences aims to publish original and significant articles, we request the assistance of reviewers in the evaluation of article submissions. Below, you will find information about the article review process, how to become a reviewer, and tips on writing a good review. Furthermore, our reviewing terms and conditions, based on COPE Principles, provide more information on how to conduct objective and constructive peer review.
Eregli Journal of Agricultural Sciences follows a double-blind peer review model.
Selection of Reviewers
Reviewers are selected from experts in the relevant field who hold a doctoral degree and have publications. Information about experts at Turkish universities can be accessed from the YÖK Academic website, and information about experts abroad can be accessed from Publons.
Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers
1. Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any possible personal biases and take them into account when evaluating an article. Reviewers should clearly express their supporting evaluations in their decisions.
2. Contributing to Editorial Decisions: Reviewer evaluations help the editor make editorial decisions and provide the author with an opportunity to improve the article. In this regard, a reviewer who feels inadequate to review an article or thinks they cannot complete the review in a short period should not accept the review invitation.
3. Confidentiality: All articles submitted to the journal for review should be kept confidential. Reviewers should not share their reviews or information about the article with anyone, nor should they contact the authors directly. Information contained in the work should not be used by a reviewer in their research without the author's express written permission. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
4. Sensitivity to Research and Publication Ethics Violations: Reviewers should be careful about possible ethical issues in the article and report them to the editor.
5. Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should not accept the review of an article that may have potential conflicts of interest due to their relationships with authors or the institutions to which the articles are affiliated.
6. Request for Citation to the Reviewer: If a reviewer suggests that an author include references to the reviewer's (or their associates') work, this should be for genuine scientific reasons, not to increase the reviewer's citation count or visibility of their work. See also Ethical Rules for Reviewers.
Conducting Reviews
Reviewers are expected to conduct their evaluations objectively. During the review process, reviewers should consider the following points when conducting their evaluations:
• Does the article contain new and important information?
• Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article?
• Is the methodology clearly and comprehensively defined?
• Are the interpretations and conclusions supported by the findings?
• Have sufficient references been made to other studies in the field?
• Is the language quality sufficient?
• Do the Turkish abstract/ English abstract/keywords accurately reflect the content of the article?
Editorial Guidelines
Selection of Editors
Editors are selected from experts who have a doctoral degree and publications in line with the scope of the journal.
Turkey Editors Workshop Group
Eregli Journal of Agricultural Sciences encourages editors to communicate with other editors, believing that this will be beneficial for them. Our editors are members of the Turkey Editors Workshop Group.
Responsibilities of Editors
Coordination of the Review Process
The editor must ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial, and timely. Research articles should be reviewed by at least two external reviewers, and additional opinions should be sought from the editor when necessary.
Selection of Reviewers
The editor will select reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant field, taking into consideration the need for appropriateness, inclusivity, and diversity. The editor will follow best practices to avoid selecting fraudulent reviewers.
Protection of Confidentiality
The editor must maintain the confidentiality of all materials submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers and authors unless otherwise agreed. In exceptional cases, and with consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals when deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct. The information included in a submitted article should not be used by an editor in their research without the explicit written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review process should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
Impartiality
Editors should evaluate manuscripts solely based on their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or the political philosophy of the authors.
Investigation of Claims
An editor who finds convincing evidence of ethical violations should contact the Editorial Board and the Publisher to secure the appropriate corrections, retractions, or other remedial actions.
Conflict of Interest
The editor should not be involved in decisions about articles they have written themselves or that have been written by family members. Such a work should be subjected to the journal's regular procedures. The editor should apply the ICMJE guidelines for disclosing potential conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers.
Publication Decision
The editor is responsible for making the final decision on which articles to publish based on the review reports. The editor must adhere to the policies set by the Editorial Board.
Citation Request to the Journal
The editor should not artificially increase any journal metric by requesting citations to articles from their journal for non-scientific reasons.
Correction, Withdrawal, Expression of Concern
Editors may consider publishing corrections if minor errors are identified that do not significantly affect the findings, interpretations, or conclusions in the published article. Editors should consider withdrawing an article when significant errors or violations are found that affect the findings and conclusions. Editors should consider expressing concern when there is evidence that the findings are unreliable, or if there is evidence that the research or publication has been misconducted, or the investigation appears to be inadequate or inconclusive. COPE and ICJME guidelines are considered regarding correction, retraction, or expression of concern.
