Peer-Review Process


1. First, the articles are examined for compliance for the journal’s rules for manuscript writing. Non-compliant articles are sent back to the author(s) for corrections before being sent to the reviewers. To avoid wasting of time, the Journal’s rules for manuscript writing should be examined. The article template could also be used.

2. The articles that are compliant with the Journal’s rules for writing are reviewed by the editorial board. At this stage, the introduction, method, results and discussion /conclusion sections of the articles are examined for appropriateness for the scope and purpose of the journal and reporting rules for a scientific manuscript. Inappropriate manuscripts or those that are not original are returned to the author without further review.

3. Articles compliant with the rules for writing and are within the scope of the journal are checked for plagiarism using iThenticate or Turnitin software programs. The accepted maximum similarity rate is 20%. The report might be shared with the authors and the article sent to author(s) for corrections in this respect if necessary. The final version of the article is also subjected to checks for plagiarism.

The Review

4. The manuscripts that pass the pre-review procedures are sent to two reviewers who are experts on the topic for a scientific evaluation of the content. Authors have 15 days to do the corrections suggested by the reviewers and submit via the same system. The corrected manuscript is sent back to the reviewer(s) who requested to see them. The final decision is made by the Editorial Board in line with the suggestions of the reviewers. If disagreement occurs between the reviewers about a manuscript, the Editorial Board may seek the advice a third reviewer.

5. The reviewer evaluations are based on originality, command of the literature on the issue, method(s) employed, ethical considerations and consistency of the presentation of the results and the discussion/conclusion.

6. The reviewers are allowed 15 days for the review process. The author(s) also have 15 days to complete the corrections suggested by the reviewers. The reviewer(s) have the option either accept the corrections made or require further corrections, as many as needed.

The Decision

7. Following the completion of the review process, the Editorial Board examines the suggestions of the reviewers and conveys the decision about the manuscript to the author(s) within 15 days.

Objecting to the Decision

8. The Journal of Language, Speech and Swallowing Research accepts the right of the author(s) to object to the results of the review process. The authors should base their objection on the views and comments leading to the result of the review process and submit it within 15 days via the DergiPark system or the Journal website. The Editorial Board has one month to consider the objection. A referee who is an expert on the topic is assigned to study the objection. The Editorial Board then reaches a final decision about the manuscript considering both the views of the referee and the reviewer comments. The author(s) are then notified.