Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Nasirus Publications understands that the power and credibility of academic publishing lies in the peer review system. We structure the process transparently and fairly.

Reviewer Selection

The Editorial Manager seeks reviewers known to be authorities in their field from Turkey and the international academic community. Selection is verified against a database for any conflicts of interest. Each field's few identified reviewers do not evaluate the same article.

Review Cycle

1. Submission: Incoming text undergoes preliminary check by Content Editor
2. Reviewer Invitation: 2–3 reviewers are invited; acceptances are awaited
3. Evaluation Report: Each reviewer submits detailed report within 4–6 weeks
4. Editorial Decision: Reports are summarized and conveyed to author/section editor
5. Author Response: Author is asked to respond to proposed changes
6. Second Round (if needed): Revised manuscript may go back to peer review

Reviewer Criteria

Reviewers evaluate the following:

• Originality: Does the text present new knowledge or perspective?
• Method: Is the research design sound? Is data collection and analysis consistent?
• Contribution: What is the significance of findings for the field?
• Presentation: Is the text clear, well-structured and appropriate for academic language?
• Citation: Are sources complete and sufficient?

Feedback Types

Accept: Manuscript is ready for publication. Accept with Revisions: Minor or moderate revision needed. Revise and Resubmit: Significant changes requested; resubmission will be reviewed. Reject: Manuscript is not suitable for this publication.

Right of Appeal

An author may appeal a reviewer decision or the content of a report. In such cases, the author's appeal and reviewer response are reconsidered in the presence of the Editor-in-Chief.