All submissions received by İleti-ş-im are reviewed first by the Editorial Board and then by (at least) two experts. During the appointment of the experts are taken into account: the academic titles of the author(s) and the reviewers, coherence between the subject of the paper and the research area of the reviewers. The evaluation process by experts is anonymous.
The final decision on the publication or rejection of a paper is made by the Scientific Committee. The remarks of the latter are sent to the author(s) with the experts' reports within approximately four months following the submission date. Accepted manuscripts are scheduled for publication according to the date when they were submitted.
The online plagiarism prevention program iThenticate is also used during the evaluation process. Manuscripts with similarities to other resources or quotations that do not comply with academic norms are automatically eliminated, and their authors are banned from publishing in the following journal issues.
When evaluating a paper, reviewers are asked to provide answers to the following questions:
1. Is the current study original? (Does it present an innovative perspective that differs from previous studies? Does the article convey its contributions to the field in a concrete way? Are the limitations of the study and future suggestions clearly presented?)
2. Is the aim of the study clearly stated in the article?
3. Are the research objectives clearly stated in the article? Are the theoretical framework, and methodological approach presented appropriate, and sufficient to generate comprehensive answers to the identified research objectives?
4. Is there enough mention of previous studies in the article? (Have these studies been cited in different parts of the article, analysis framework, finding and discussion, etc.? Is there an important study that is not mentioned in the article?)
5. How can this work benefit the community, academia, or any other related study? Who can benefit from this study?
6. Does the article's title reflect the study's main problem?
7. Does the summary of the study cover the aim, findings, and conclusion of the study?
8. Does the study structure include concrete titles that we expect to see in a scientific article, such as “Introduction”, “Literature summary”, “Research Questions”, “Method”, “Results”, “Discussion”, and “Conclusion”?
All in-text references should include the last name of the author and year of publication followed by page numbers when directly quoting the author’s words (Barthes, 1975, p. 104).
For joint authors, both last names should be given (Lipovetsky and Charles, 2004); for three or more authors, the first author’s last name should be followed by et. al. (Jenkins et al., 2009). The references should be separated when citing multiple sources with a semicolon (Alemdar, 1999; Oskay, 1994).
More than one reference from the same author in the same year must be identified by the letters “a, b, c” (Cassetti, 2011a), and these letters should be consistent with the list of references at the end.
Depending on whether the name of the author cited is mentioned or not in the text, secondary citations should be given as follows: (as cited in Elsaesser, 2004, p. 82) or (Musser, as cited in Elsaesser, 2004, p. 82)
The list of references should include only the sources cited in the text. Regardless of the type of source, all sources must be listed first alphabetically by author last names and then chronologically.
Various examples of works cited in APA format can be found at this link: https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines