Publication Ethics Statement
The Journal of History and Strategy adheres to the highest standards of publication ethics and adopts the ethical publishing principles set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
All submitted manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The author must declare that the manuscript is original, has not been published previously, and is not under review for publication in any other journal or in any other language. Authors must adhere to applicable copyright laws and agreements. Copyrighted material (e.g., tables, figures, or large quotations) must be used with the necessary permissions and appropriate acknowledgments. The works of other authors or contributors, as well as any sources referenced, must be properly cited. Once a manuscript is under review, requests for changes to the list of authors cannot be made.
Evaluation Stages of Submitted Manuscripts
Editorial Evaluation: Every manuscript submitted via the DergiPark system undergoes an initial evaluation by the editorial team based on its theme and content. Manuscripts with a similarity rate exceeding 15%, excluding references and the bibliography, will be directly rejected without entering the review process. Any responsibility arising from non-compliance with ethical rules, scientific citation standards, and plagiarism regulations lies with the author(s). Authors must guarantee the originality of their submitted works. Manuscripts that align with the journal's thematic scope are evaluated by the editorial team for adherence to the journal's publishing guidelines and formal requirements (e.g., the number of words in the article, abstract, and keywords, compliance with translations into foreign languages, citation rules, etc.). Manuscripts not meeting formal standards will be returned to the author for revision.
The editor evaluates manuscripts independently of the authors' ethnic origin, gender, nationality, religious beliefs, or political philosophy. The editor ensures that all information related to the submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the article is published. When selecting referees, the editor ensures their impartiality, expertise, and maintains confidentiality throughout the review process.
A manuscript from an author whose previous work has been published in the journal can only be considered for review after at least two issues have passed.
Publication Board Evaluation and Referee Selection: Each manuscript that meets the formal requirements, as assessed by the editorial team, is anonymized (author identity is concealed) and then sent to the members of the Publication Board. The editor, along with the editorial assistants, convenes a "Double-Blind Publication Board", consisting of academics from different universities, to review the manuscript. The manuscripts are assessed one by one according to the journal’s principles. Decisions regarding the manuscripts are made through consensus in most cases, or through a vote in some instances. The possible decisions are: "send to referees," "revise," or "reject." Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's publication standards or scientific publishing criteria and cannot be corrected by the Publication Board will be rejected. Manuscripts deemed appropriate for review are sent to external referees within 10 working days. Every manuscript is reviewed by two independent referee. If one referee provides a positive report and the other gives a negative review, a third referee is assigned to resolve the evaluation. The journal aims to complete the editorial and peer review process within a maximum of 90 days. If the editor identifies and documents any violation of accepted ethical standards in a manuscript—whether during the peer review process or after a positive review—the manuscript will be withdrawn from the publication process.
Referee Evaluation: Referees assess manuscripts independently of the authors' ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, or political beliefs. They must have no conflict of interest or competitive relationship with the authors or supporters of the manuscript being reviewed. All referee decisions must be based on objective criteria. If a referee has contributed to the writing of the manuscript or has any personal relationship with the author, they should decline to review that manuscript. Referees are required to complete the manuscript evaluation form thoroughly and provide detailed justifications in the comments section of their report. Referees must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and must not use the information obtained during the review process for their own benefit, or for the benefit or detriment of others or any institution. If a referee determines that the content of a submitted manuscript does not fall within their area of expertise, or if they believe they will be unable to complete the evaluation within the required time, they should inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.