Evaluation Principles
1) Articles that have not been published before or are not currently being evaluated in another journal for publication and are approved by each author are accepted for evaluation.
2) Submitted articles that pass the preliminary check are scanned for plagiarism using Turnitin or iThenticate software.
3)MAS Journal of Applied Sciences conducts a double-blind referee process. All studies will first be evaluated by the editor for suitability for the journal. Articles deemed appropriate are sent to at least two independent expert referees to evaluate the scientific quality of the article.
4) The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the articles independently of the authors' ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs and political philosophy. It ensures that articles submitted for publication are fairly evaluated by double-blind referees.
5) Chief editor; It does not allow conflict of interest among authors, editors and referees.
6) Final Editorial Decision; The Editor-in-Chief has final editorial responsibility for the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts. For manuscripts that enter external peer review, the final decision is made by considering the independent external reviewer reports, the authors' responses to reviewer comments, the adequacy of revisions, and compliance with the journal's scientific, ethical, and editorial policies. Reviewer recommendations constitute scientific advice to the editor; however, a research manuscript cannot be accepted without the required favorable external reviewer evaluations. Editorial decisions may be appealed in accordance with the journal's Appeals and Complaints Policy.
7) Editors are not involved in decisions about articles written by themselves or their family members or colleagues, or that relate to products or services in which the editor is interested. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures.
Referees must ensure that all information regarding submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published, and if they notice any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author, they must report it to the editor.
If the referee does not feel qualified about the subject of the article or does not seem able to provide timely feedback, he/she should inform the editor of this situation and ask not to include him/her in the referee process.
During the evaluation process, the editor clearly states that the articles sent to the referees for review are the private property of the authors and that this is a privileged communication. Referees and editorial board members cannot discuss articles with other people. Care should be taken to keep the identity of the referees confidential.
Evaluation process
Judging Type: Double Blinding
Double Blinding: After the plagiarism check, the eligible articles are evaluated by the editor-in-chief in terms of originality, methodology, importance of the subject covered and compatibility with the scope of the journal. The editor ensures that the articles go through double-blind refereeing in a fair manner and, if the article complies with the formal principles, submits the incoming article to the evaluation of at least two referees from home and/or abroad, and if the referees deem it necessary, they approve its publication after the requested changes are made by the authors.
Review Time: Pre-Release
Author-Referee Interaction: Editors mediate all interactions between referees and authors.
Time in Review: The period until the first decision is approximately 20 days for research articles taken into the referee process for review in MAS Journal of Applied Sciences.
Plagiarism Check: Yes - Turnitin or iThenticate scans articles to prevent plagiarism.
Number of Referees Reviewing Each Article: Two-three
Allowed Time: 20 days. This period can be extended by adding 10 days.
Decision: In order for the article to be accepted for publication by the Editor, at least two referees must make an acceptance decision.
Suspicion of Ethical Violation: When reviewers suspect research or publication misconduct, they must report the situation to the Editor. The editor is responsible for carrying out the necessary actions in accordance with COPE recommendations.
The Editor-in-Chief reviews the research article on the day it is submitted, and if he thinks the article is worthy of further consideration, he sends it to the deputy editor for further review. For research articles, the assistant editor usually reads each article from cover to cover. We aim to reach an initial decision within two or three weeks for all manuscripts, but usually an initial decision is made within a few days of submission. If we do not think that MAS Journal of Applied Sciences is the right journal for the study, we immediately notify the authors so that they can submit their work elsewhere without delay. The usual reasons for rejection at this stage are insufficient originality and the topic being outside the scope of the journal.The next step for your research article is our Editorial Board meeting. Members will read your article and discuss its importance, originality and scientific quality. To make editorial decisions for research articles, we mainly focus on the research question. Even if the subject of the article is relevant to the scope of the journal, current and important, we may reject the article if it does not have a research question. Of course, the work will be rejected if it has serious flaws. Everyone attending the article meeting is asked to declare any relevant conflicting interests at the outset, and anyone with a significant conflicting interest either leaves the room or speaks last while the relevant article is discussed (depending on the nature and extent of their interests).your article is suitable for MAS Journal of Applied Sciences, the section editor will send your article to two external referees. Reviewers make recommendations to editors, who make the final decision. We ask referees to approve their reports and declare any conflicts of interest on the article we send to them. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief after external peer review processes.
Some articles may also be viewed by the ethics editor of MAS Journal of Applied Sciences and by third parties deemed appropriate by the editor, in cases where serious research misconduct is suspected.
After submission for all articles We aim to reach a final decision on publication within 6 to 8 weeks . If we propose a publication subject to revision, we usually ask authors to revise their articles and upload them to the system within the next month.
Accepted articles are published at https://masjaps.com/index.php/mas/issue/archive as they are prepared . Once published, articles are selected for the next issue.
MAS Journal of Applied Sciences provides open access to articles as part of its commitment to readers and authors. All our articles are freely accessible online.
If you notice any errors in your published article, email the editor-in-chief who will let you know if corrections will be made.
Peer Review Process Principles for the Work of the Editorial Staff
Editorial articles and analysis articles written by MAS Journal of Applied Sciences own editors do not undergo external referee evaluation. Original research articles are sent to at least two external referees under blind peer review. During this period, those editors' roles are suspended.
Responsibilities of Authors
The author must comply with research and publication ethics.
The author should not attempt to publish the same work in more than one journal.
The author must fully state in the bibliography the works he used in writing the article.
Editor's Responsibilities
The editor evaluates manuscripts in terms of scientific content, regardless of the authors' ethnicity, gender, citizenship, religious belief or political opinion.
The editor conducts a fair double-blind peer review of articles submitted for publication and ensures that all information regarding submitted articles is kept confidential before publication.
The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. Referees and the editorial board cannot discuss the articles with other people. The anonymity of referees must be ensured. In certain cases, the editor may share a reviewer's review with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.
The editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication. It is also his responsibility to issue a correction note or retract when necessary.
The Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, and relevant Section Editors are responsible for identifying appropriate independent external reviewers and managing the peer-review process, taking into account the subject of the manuscript, reviewer expertise, independence, and potential conflicts of interest. The Editorial Board may provide scientific and editorial advice when necessary; however, its role is advisory. Final editorial responsibility for the acceptance or rejection of research manuscripts rests with the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision by considering the external reviewer reports, the authors' responses and revisions, the scientific integrity of the manuscript, and compliance with the journal's editorial and ethical policies.
Responsibilities of Referees
Reviewers should not have any conflict of interest regarding the research, authors and/or research funders.
The referees' evaluations must be objective.
The language and style used by the referees should not be offensive to the author.
Reviewers must ensure that all information regarding submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published.
If referees notice copyright infringement or plagiarism in the work they review, they must notify the editor.
A referee who feels inadequate to review a manuscript or who thinks that he/she cannot complete the review within the specified time should withdraw from the review process.
During the referee process, referees are expected to make their evaluations by taking into account the following issues: Does the article contain new and important information? / Does the abstract clearly and neatly describe the content of the article? / Is the method described in a complete and understandable manner? / Are the interpretations and conclusions substantiated by the findings? / Are sufficient references given to other studies in the field? / Is the language quality sufficient?
Editorial Preliminary Screening and Plagiarism Check
All manuscripts submitted to MAS Journal of Applied Sciences undergo an editorial preliminary screening before external peer review. This stage is an internal editorial assessment and is separate from the external peer-review process. No external reviewer is appointed at this stage. During the preliminary screening, the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor evaluates the manuscript with respect to the journal's aims and scope, article type, originality and basic scientific relevance, language quality, manuscript organization and formatting, methodological adequacy, completeness of required documents, research and publication ethics, and compliance with the journal's submission requirements. The manuscript is also screened for plagiarism using Turnitin or iThenticate.
The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor may reject a manuscript without external peer review (desk rejection) when:
-the manuscript is outside the aims and scope of the journal;
-the submitted article type is not accepted by the journal;
-the manuscript demonstrates insufficient originality or scientific relevance at preliminary assessment;
-fundamental scientific or methodological deficiencies make external peer review inappropriate;
-the language is so inadequate that reliable scientific evaluation is not possible;
-the manuscript substantially fails to comply with the journal's submission or formatting requirements and the deficiencies are not corrected after an editorial request;
-mandatory ethics approval, informed consent, or other required ethical documentation is missing where applicable;
-plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification, inappropriate text recycling, or another serious publication-ethics concern is identified; or
-the manuscript is simultaneously under consideration by another journal.
Minor and correctable deficiencies in formatting, presentation, or language will normally result in a request for correction rather than immediate rejection. Authors are informed of the principal reason(s) when a manuscript is rejected at the editorial preliminary screening stage.
Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial preliminary screening proceed to external peer review.
Field Editor Review
Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial preliminary screening and plagiarism check may be assigned to the relevant Section Editor for further academic assessment and reviewer selection. The Section Editor evaluates the manuscript's subject relevance, scientific presentation, methodological appropriateness, and suitability for external peer review. This assessment remains part of the editorial screening process and does not constitute external peer review.
External Peer Review (Scientific Evaluation)
Editöryal ön incelemeyi başarıyla geçen makaleler, ilgili konu alanında uzmanlığa sahip en az iki bağımsız dış hakeme gönderilir. MAS Journal of Applied Sciences, yazarların ve hakemlerin kimliklerinin karşılıklı olarak gizlendiği, çift kör hakem değerlendirme sürecini uygular.
Hakemler makaleyi; özgünlük, bilimsel katkı, metodoloji, veri analizi, bulguların geçerliliği, sonuçlar ve varılan yargılar arasındaki tutarlılık, bilimsel uygunluk, literatürün yeterliliği, bilimsel sunum kalitesi ve ilgili etik standartlara uyum açısından değerlendirirler.
Hakemler; Kabul, Küçük Düzeltme, Büyük Düzeltme veya Red yönünde görüş bildirebilirler. Hakem önerileri bilimsel tavsiye niteliği taşır ve tek başına nihai editöryal kararı oluşturmaz.
Bir araştırma makalesinin yayımlanmak üzere kabul edilebilmesi için, gerekli düzeltmeler tatmin edici bir şekilde tamamlandıktan sonra en az iki bağımsız dış hakemin olumlu değerlendirme sunması gerekir. İki temel hakem raporu arasında önemli ölçüde çelişki olması durumunda —özellikle bir hakemin olumlu görüş bildirip diğerinin reddi önermesi halinde— makale üçüncü bir bağımsız dış hakeme gönderilir.
Nihai editöryal karar; hakem raporları, yazarların yanıtları ve düzeltilmiş makale dikkate alınarak Baş Editör tarafından verilir.
Correction Phase
If the referees request corrections in the text they review, the relevant reports are sent to the author and he is asked to correct his work. The author makes corrections in the Word program with the "Track Changes" feature turned on or indicates the changes in the text in red. He submits the corrected text to the field editor.
Field Editor Control
The field editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.
Referee Control
The referee who requests correction checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.
Turkish Language Control
The works that pass the referee process are examined by the Turkish Language Editor and the Editor-in-Chief, and if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The control process is completed within 15 days at most.
English Language Check
Studies that pass Turkish language control are examined by the English Language Editor and, if necessary, corrections are requested from the author. The checking process of the English language editor is completed within a maximum of 15 days.
Final Editorial Assessment
Manuscripts that have successfully completed external peer review and the required editorial, technical, language, and statistical checks proceed to final editorial assessment.
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision by considering the external reviewer reports, the authors' responses to reviewer comments, the adequacy of revisions, the scientific integrity of the manuscript, and compliance with the journal's editorial and ethical policies.
The relevant Section Editor and/or members of the Editorial Board may provide scientific or editorial advice when necessary. Such advice is consultative and does not replace the final decision-making responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief.
A research manuscript that has not obtained the required favorable external reviewer evaluations cannot be accepted solely at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. However, the Editor-in-Chief may reject a manuscript despite favorable reviewer recommendations if a serious ethical violation, research-integrity concern, undisclosed conflict of interest, legal concern, or fundamental scientific or methodological problem is identified.
The issue in which an accepted manuscript will be published is determined by the Editorial Office according to editorial planning, technical preparation, and issue capacity.
Typesetting and Layout Stage
Manuscripts accepted for publication by the Editor-in-Chief proceed to the typesetting and layout stage. The publication-ready version is sent to the corresponding author for final proof checking. At this stage, only typesetting, formatting, or production errors may be corrected; substantial changes affecting the scientific content are not permitted.
Data Sending to National and International Indexes
The data of the published issue is transmitted to the relevant indexes within 15 days.
Last Update Time: 08.08.2026