Editorial team are committed to prompt evaluation and publication of fully accepted papers in Rast Musicology Journal (RMJ). To maintain a high-quality publication, all submissions undergo a rigorous review process. Characteristics of the peer review process are as follows:

* Simultaneous submissions of the same papers to different journals will not be accepted.

* Manuscripts with contents different from of scope of RMJ will not be considered for review.

* The Editor asks the author(s) of conflict of interest when making the decision to accept publications and articles. In addition, authors cannot do unethical things such as adding authors in the article evaluation process.

*  Depending on RMJ peer review policy, submissions usually will be reviewed at least by 2 independent reviewers.

* At RMJ, referees are selected by field editors who are at least doctoral graduates, specialized in areas covered by the journal's scope, and not members of the editorial board.

*  Besides, Editor(s) of RMJ will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed.

* In the peer review process, the author cannot remain unresponsive to the editor's revision requests, and cannot be indifferent.

* Publication decisions of RMJ are made by the Editors-in-Chief/Managing Editor of RMJ in terms of the reviewers' reports.

* The editor and the author continue the peer review process with a certain respect and courtesy. Communications in all processes are recorded in the messaging box of the Dergipark Journal System.

* Submitted articles documents are in safe every time.

* The articles must be submitted before the peer review of the plagiarism reports begins.

* After the article pre-review process, the rejection decision and the peer review process, the author should not contact the editor about the decision. In this case, the author is prohibited from submitting to RMJ for 2 years.

* The editor can receive the plagiarism (similarity) report at the beginning, in the process and at the end of the review.

* Reviewers appointed as reviewers at RMJ and completing their duties are required to endorse this on the Clarivate Publons platform.

* Reviewers are requested to delete the "word user (on office software)" records that can decipher themselves in the file where they show their comments on the text.

* In terms of the quality of the articles, all of the articles are blinded for the review of the referees.

All these principles act within the commitment of the RMJ editorial board. It receives and implements recommendations from the editorial board for the development of review policies.

The peer review process is quite tiring and requires patience. All steps of this process until the article is ready for publication are shown in the Peer Review Process Flow Chart

Figure 1. Peer Review Process Flow Chart

The peer review process is also a process that requires a lot of patience, experience and knowledge for young academics who have just started academic research. RMJ is an academic journal that cares about educating young music researchers. That's why you examine the flow chart we prepared for a better understanding of the peer review processes. The average editorial review and decision period is 10 days, and the peer-review period is 60 days.