Kader uses a double blind review system.

Kader operates a two-stage process in the evaluation of submitted manuscripts: editorial internal review and external peer review. Immediately after submission, the Editor checks the article for compliance with the journal's purpose and scope and adherence to ethical standards in research and writing. Subsequently, he/she refers the articles that comply with the journal's publication policy to the internal referee for editorial review. The internal referee is selected from among the members of the Editorial Board. The internal referee evaluates the article in terms of subject, methodology and results and decides whether the article should be included in the detailed review process. If the first internal referee presents a negative report, the article is sent to a second internal referee and rejected if the second report is also negative. If the second internal referee report is positive, the next step is taken. At this stage, one of the field editors is selected as an internal referee for formal review. The field editor reviews the manuscript for compliance with the journal's writing rules and subjects the manuscript to Turnitin or iThenticate scanning for plagiarism detection. In this process, the identity of the internal referee is open to the author and the identity of the author is open to the referee. Then the external evaluation process begins. At the external evaluation stage, two external referees are selected by the Field Editor from among the experts who have research on the subject of the article. If there are no experts in the field of the article, the referees are selected from among researchers with a PhD degree in that discipline. The referees evaluate the article in detail in terms of its subject, method and results and give their opinion on whether it should be published or not. If both referee reports are positive, the manuscript is accepted for publication with the decision of the Editor. If one of the two referees has a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third referee. Manuscripts are accepted for publication with the positive decision of at least two referees. The manuscript accepted for publication is sent for English language control.

Kader uses a double blind refereeing system in which the identities of referees and authors are kept confidential to each other. For this reason, referee names are not published. Authors and reviewers should endeavor to keep their identities confidential. For this purpose, authors, editors and referees who submit files to the system should pay attention to the points that will prevent the identity from being revealed in the texts and files. Authors should delete their names and institutions in the text of the article, including side texts such as page footnotes. When Microsoft Word documents are stored, personal information is saved in the file information. Therefore, personal information should be found and deleted from the document properties.

Anonymization of the manuscript for double blind review:
• Do not include author names anywhere in the manuscript or in any Supplementary Information file (or any file name).
• Do not include an Acknowledgments or Conflict of Interest section with author names in the manuscript during initial submission. This information can be added to the manuscript after the peer review process is complete. However, please share this information with the editor in charge at the first stage.
• Do not include articles that have not yet been accepted for publication in the reference list.
• When referring to your own work in the manuscript, avoid using terminology that may reveal your identity (e.g., “we have already shown [in this paper]”).
• Do not submit objections at the proofreading stage with author names.
Author anonymity prevents reviewer bias. Please submit your work accordingly. Kader will review your manuscript to avoid the above-mentioned potential problems and will remove any overlooked information from the manuscript before the refereeing process.

Kader submits manuscripts for review by internal and external referees. Detailed information about this process is provided below:

Review Time: Pre-Publication
Number of Reviewers: One Internal Reviewer (Editorial Review) - Two External Reviewers (Peer Review)
Author-Referee Interaction: Mediates all interactions between editors, reviewers and authors.
Referee Interaction: Reviewers can only communicate with editors.
Time in Review: Average 70 Days / 10 Weeks
Plagiarism Prevention Similarity Screening: In progress - iThenticate or Turnitin
Decision: The final decision on whether or not to publish an article rests with the editor-in-chief. The editor's decision is final.

Article Review Process
1. Editorial Review: Immediately after submission, the Editor pre-checks the manuscript for compliance with the journal's purpose and scope and adherence to ethical standards in research and writing.

2. Editorial Board Review: Internal Review - 1 (Review Type: Blind Review)
One internal reviewer is selected by the Editor from among the members of the Editorial Board according to their areas of expertise. The internal referee evaluates the article in terms of subject, methodology and results and decides whether the article should be included in the refereeing process for further evaluation. During the process, the identity of the internal referees is kept confidential to the author and the identity of the author is kept confidential to the referees.

3. Preliminary Review and Similarity Screening: Internal Review - 2
One of the assistant editors is assigned as an internal referee and reviews the article for compliance with the journal's writing rules. Then, he/she creates the similarity report using iThenticate or Turnitin software.

4. Article Review: External Review (Review Type: Double Blind Review)
At this stage, two external referees take part. Two external referees are selected by the Field Editor from among the researchers who have conducted research on the subject of the article. If there are no referees who have conducted research on the subject of the article, the referees are selected from among researchers with a PhD degree in that discipline. The referees evaluate the article in detail in terms of its subject, method and results and express their opinions on whether the article should be published or not. If both referee reports are positive, the manuscript is accepted for publication with the decision of the Editor-in-Chief. If one of the two referees has a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third referee. Studies can be published with the positive decision of at least two referees. External referees cannot learn the identity of the author and the author cannot learn the identity of the referees.
During the refereeing process, referees are expected to make their evaluations by taking into account the following points.

1) Does the article contain new and important information?
2) Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article?
3) Is the methodology coherent and clearly defined?
4) Are the interpretations and conclusions substantiated by the findings?
5) Are adequate references given to other studies in the field?
6) Is the language quality adequate?

Preparation of the Article for Publication
The manuscript accepted for publication is submitted to the Language Editor for English language control.
The author is asked to revise the text in line with the requests of the Editor and the Language Editor. The revised text is sent to typesetting by the Editor. The issue in which the typeset articles will be published is planned by the Editor.

Ethical Violation Notifications
Notifications of errors and ethical violations regarding published articles are tracked via kaderdergi@gmail.com e-mail account and reviewed by the Editorial Board.

Data Submission to National and International Indexes
The article metadata of the published issue is sent within 15 days to the indexes that do not automatically retrieve this information from the system.

Editor's Responsibilities
1) The editor evaluates manuscripts for scientific content without regard to the ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, religious beliefs or political philosophy of the authors.
2) The Editor conducts a fair double-blind peer review of manuscripts submitted for publication and ensures that all information about submitted manuscripts is kept confidential before publication.
3) The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. Reviewers and the editorial board cannot discuss manuscripts with other people. The anonymity of reviewers must be ensured. In certain cases, the editor may share a reviewer's review with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.
4) The Editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication. It is also his/her responsibility to issue a correction note or withdrawal when necessary.
5) The Editor does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors and reviewers. Only the referee has full authority to appoint reviewers and is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of manuscripts in the Journal.

Responsibilities of Referees
1) Reviewers should not have any conflicts of interest related to the research, the authors and/or the research funders. Their judgment should be objective.
2) Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts is kept confidential and should notify the editor if they are aware of copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author.
3) A reviewer who feels incapable of reviewing the subject matter of an article, or who knows that immediate review will be impossible, should notify the editor and be excused from the review process.

Referee Guidelines
Please follow the steps below to evaluate an article submitted from the system:
1. Log in with your username and password.
2. Select Kader Journal in the top menu and log in.
3. Click on the “Articles in Process” button on the left side.
4. On the page that opens, you will see the name and status of the article you are asked to evaluate. Click on the article name.
5. On the new page that opens, you are asked whether you agree to evaluate the article. To accept, you need to click on the “I want to evaluate” button in the green section.
6. After accepting the evaluation, you can download the article file by clicking on the “Evaluation Version” title in the dialog section. You can evaluate the article by clicking on the “Complete and Submit Form” link on the same page. Note: The online referee form opens smoothly in CHROME browser; in EXPLORER, errors may occur due to security settings.
7. You can upload the additional file that you have corrected to the system from the ADD-FILE-SUBMIT section.
8. After completing the entire form, you should click the “Save and Finish” button.

For more detailed information, you can visit our referee guide page.