Editorial Policies

Preliminary Review

Before articles proceed to the evaluation stage, they are reviewed by the editorial board for compliance with writing guidelines, similarity reports, ethics committee reports, and the copyright form. Articles that do not comply with publication principles, have missing files, or do not meet writing guidelines are returned to the author during the Preliminary Review stage for correction and completion.

 Peer Review

Articles that have all required files uploaded to the system and comply with the specified publication principles and writing guidelines are sent to at least two reviewers selected by the editorial board for evaluation. This process is conducted as a double-blind review. Throughout the process, the identities of both the authors and reviewers remain confidential. Reviewers are selected by the editorial board based on their areas of expertise for the article's evaluation. Review feedback is submitted to the editor via the system, along with evaluation reports or related revision files.

During the review process, direct communication between authors and reviewers is not allowed; necessary communication is facilitated by the editors through the journal email. The editorial board is responsible for delivering the reviewer reports to the authors and the authors' revisions to the reviewers.

 

Evaluations and Revisions

The peer review process assists the editor in making editorial decisions and may also help the author improve the article through editorial communications.

Articles that undergo scientific review are:

• Published if each reviewer gives a "publishable" report.
• If one reviewer gives a "publishable" report and the other gives a "not publishable" report, the article is sent to a third reviewer, and the decision is made based on the third reviewer's report.
• If the reviewers suggest revisions, the article is returned to the author to make the necessary revisions. The author must submit the revisions to the journal within one month at the latest. The revised article is then re-evaluated by the reviewers. If the author disputes the reviewer's feedback during the evaluation stage, the opinion of another reviewer is sought.
• If one or both reviewers give a "publishable after revisions" report, the articles are returned to the authors for necessary revisions.

Articles that receive positive feedback from two reviewers may be accepted by the editorial board, while articles that receive negative feedback from both reviewers are rejected.

Publication

Articles that receive a "publishable" opinion from at least two reviewers are added to the publication portfolio and published as open access on the OJHSS website according to the order determined by the Editorial Board. Even if the reviewers have provided positive feedback, the publication of the articles is subject to the decision of the Editorial Board.

Odine Journal of Human and Social Sciences (OJHSS) subjects all articles submitted for evaluation and publication to at least double-blind peer review for originality, ethical considerations, and useful contributions. Editorial and reviewer decisions are the only and final tools for the publication of articles in the journal.