Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

The editorial team of the Turkish Music Journal (TM) is committed to ensuring that accepted manuscripts are evaluated and published promptly, fairly, and according to the highest academic standards. For this purpose, all submissions undergo a rigorous editorial pre-review and peer review process.

Editorial Pre-Review
– Manuscripts are first screened by the editors.
– In cases of language deficiencies, high similarity rate (20% or more plagiarism or AI-generated content), non-compliance with submission guidelines, or low scientific quality, a direct Editorial Rejection decision may be issued.
– For articles derived from master’s or doctoral theses, it is recommended that the responsible author be the thesis supervisor in order to ensure smoother processing.
– The pre-review decision is communicated to the author within 10 days at the latest.

Peer Review
– Manuscripts passing the pre-review are evaluated by at least two independent subject experts under a double-blind review system.
– Reviewers are given a maximum of 60 days to prepare their reports.
– The final editorial decision is made within 90 days after the completion of the reports. Any delays and their justifications are communicated to the author.
– During the peer review process, authors are obliged to respond promptly to editorial revision requests. Failure to do so may result in termination of the process.

Ethics and Conflicts of Interest
– Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals is not permitted.
– Manuscripts outside the scope of TM are not considered for review.
– Editors require authors to declare any conflicts of interest when making publication and acceptance decisions.
– Authors may not attempt unethical practices such as adding or removing authors during the review process.

Plagiarism and Similarity Check
– A similarity report must be provided by the author before the peer review process begins.
– The editor may request the plagiarism report again at the beginning, during, or at the end of the review process.

Peer Review Process and Communication
– Reviewers are required to remove any “Word user” metadata or personal identifiers from the documents they submit.
– All correspondence during the review process is conducted through the editorial e-mail address and the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform and is archived.
– Reviewers are expected to verify their reviews on the Clarivate Publons platform.
– Manuscripts are sent to reviewers in a fully anonymized form.

Sanctions
– If authors engage in inappropriate and persistent communication with the editor regarding a final decision (following pre-review, rejection, or peer review), they may be prohibited from submitting new manuscripts to TM for a period of up to two years.

Security and Confidentiality
– Submitted manuscript files and reviewer reports are securely stored under strict confidentiality.