About the Journal

Peer Review Process

Istanbul Policy Review follows a double blind peer review policy. Articles submitted to the journal are screened by the editorial team and then, if appropriate, sent to two reviewers. Finally, in the light of reviewer comments, the editorial team reaches a decision about publication. This decision is final.

Research Articles, Letters, Brief Communications, Case Studies, Reports, Analysis, Reviews, and Viewpoints are peer-reviewed. All forms of published correction may also be peer-reviewed at the discretion of the editors. Other contributions are not usually peer-reviewed. 

All submitted manuscripts are read by our editorial staff. Only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent to reviewers. Those papers judged by the editors to be of insufficient general interest or otherwise inappropriate are desk rejected without external review. Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent to two or more reviewers. The editors then make a decision based on the reviewers' advice.

Reviewers are welcome to recommend a particular course of action, but they should bear in mind that the other reviewers of a particular paper may have different technical expertise and/or views, and the editors may have to make a decision based on conflicting advice. The most useful reports, therefore, provide the editors with the information on which a decision should be based. Setting out the arguments for and against publication is often more helpful to the editors than a direct recommendation one way or the other.

Our editors evaluate the strength of the arguments raised by reviewers and by the authors, and may also consider other information not available to either party. Our primary responsibilities are to our readers and to the scientific community at large, and in deciding how best to serve them, we must weigh the claims of each paper against the many others also under consideration. Reviewers' criticisms are taken seriously, particularly the technical criticisms.

Transnational Press London (TPL) journals uphold a thorough and meticulous peer review process to ensure the quality and credibility of the research published. The process involves several stages of evaluation, involving experts in the relevant fields. While the exact process may vary slightly between different TPL journals, the general steps are as follows:

1. Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts electronically through the journal's online submission system. The manuscript should adhere to the journal's guidelines for formatting and content.

2. Editorial Screening: The journal's editorial team conducts an initial screening to assess whether the submission aligns with the journal's scope and meets basic formatting requirements. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be returned to authors for revision or rejected at this stage.

3. Peer Review Assignment: If the manuscript passes the initial screening, it is assigned to one or more expert reviewers who have expertise in the subject area. Reviewers are typically academics or researchers with a strong background in the field.

4. Double-Blind Review: TPL journals often employ a double-blind peer review process. This means that the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential. This minimizes biases and ensures that the evaluation is based solely on the quality of the research.

5. Review Process: Reviewers thoroughly assess the manuscript, considering aspects such as originality, methodology, significance of findings, clarity of presentation, and adherence to ethical standards. They provide constructive feedback and make recommendations for revisions if necessary.

6. Reviewer Reports: Reviewers submit their feedback and recommendations to the journal's editorial team. The reports typically include comments for both the authors and the editors. Authors may receive suggestions for improvements, clarifications, or additional information.

7. Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewer reports, the journal's editors make an informed decision. Possible decisions include acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection. The editors ensure that the reviewers' feedback is consistent and relevant to the manuscript's quality.

8. Revisions: If revisions are required, authors address the reviewers' comments and make appropriate changes to the manuscript. They may also provide a point-by-point response to the reviewers' suggestions.

9. Second Review (if necessary): In some cases, the revised manuscript may undergo a second review to ensure that the requested changes have been adequately addressed.

10. Final Decision: The editorial team makes the final decision based on the revised manuscript and the responses to the reviewers' comments.

11. Publication: Once the manuscript is accepted, it undergoes copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading before being published in the journal.

The peer review process at Transnational Press London journals is designed to maintain the highest standards of scholarship and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in various academic fields.

Istanbul Policy Review follows the rules of publication ethics to ensure academic objectivity and rigour of the journal.

Publication Frequency

Istanbul Policy Review is published three times a year in May and November.