Evaluation Policies

Articles and translations are subjected to two types of evaluation:

Structural Evaluation

• Writing Control: The texts are examined in terms of shape, writing rules and compliance with the APA7 Citation System. Authors should make the corrections within 15 days.

• Plagiarism/Similarity Control: Texts are examined in terms of plagiarism/similarity rate. The plagiarism/similarity rate determined by the Editorial Board is 20%. Articles exceeding this rate are rejected without being included in the referee process.

• Language Control: Grammatical control of the text of each article is carried out.

• Revision and Proofreading: In order to ensure the unity in linguistic expression and writing style, necessary corrections are made to the language and style of the text without interfering with the content and within the knowledge of the author. After this stage, no correction is requested from the author, but the text is sent to the author for the final reading.

Academic Evaluation

• Editorial Board Evaluation

• Taking the field of the text into account, each article is sent to two editorial board members by the editor.

• Editorial Board members examine and evaluate the studies according to the Editorial Board Evaluation Criteria within the framework of a double-blind evaluation system and make referee recommendations.

• The articles reviewed and evaluated by the Editorial Board are subjected to a score ranking, and the first 25 articles are included in the evaluation process.

For the Book and Symposium Reviews, the evaluation is made by the editor of the field assigned by the editor.

• Referee Evaluation:

• The texts are subjected to academic evaluation by the referees determined by the editorial board. In the referee evaluation process, the text is sent to the author for corrections if the referee requests it. The author must fill in the Author Correction Form along with the corrected text.

• If the texts receive positive reports from both referees, they are submitted to the Editorial Board is submitted to its final decision.

Texts with a negative report by one referee are returned to the author, even if the other is positive.

• It is important that the authors do not exceed the dates given for corrections in order for the journal publishing process to function properly. The texts of the authors who do not make corrections within the specified dates are removed from the evaluation process.

Referee Policy

• IUA JT (Journal of Theology) double-sided blind refereeing system is applied.

• Confidentiality is essential in the referee reports; therefore, referee names are not mentioned in the journal. • Multiple articles can be sent to a referee