FOR REVIEWERS

Serving as a reviewer for Mentis Journal carries significant responsibility in ensuring the quality of scientific publications in the field of education. This guide provides detailed information about the ethical standards and responsibilities that reviewers must follow in the review process at Mentis. Adhering to these guidelines is crucial in maintaining the quality and reliability of publications.

  1. Review Process and Impartiality
  • Double-Blind Peer Review: Mentis Journal employs a double-blind peer review system. In this system, reviewers' identities are not shared with the authors, and vice versa. Reviewers are prohibited from contacting authors directly.
  • Objective and Unbiased Evaluation: Reviewers should evaluate articles objectively, without bias or personal opinions. The assessment should focus solely on the scientific contribution and quality of the work.
  • Conflict of Interest Disclosure: During the review, reviewers should avoid any conflicts of interest with the authors or the financial supporters of the work. If such a situation arises, reviewers should inform the editors and refrain from evaluating the work.
  1. Evaluation Criteria and Feedback
  • Scientific Contribution and Originality: Reviewers should consider whether the work aligns with Mentis's scope, the level of scientific contribution it provides, and its originality. The study is expected to offer new insights in the field of education and contribute to practical applications.
  • Constructive and Respectful Feedback: Reviewers should provide feedback constructively, based on scientific foundations, avoiding personal comments, criticism, or disparaging remarks. Suggestions for improvement should be clear, direct, and understandable.
  • Complete and Timely Review: Reviewers are expected to complete the review process within the specified timeframe. Delays can negatively impact the publication process for authors and the journal. Reviewers unable to complete their review should immediately inform the editors.
  1. Confidentiality and Information Security
  • Confidentiality: Reviewers are responsible for keeping all information provided during the review process confidential. Any information regarding the article should not be shared with others until the work is published.
  • Protection of Confidential Documents: All documents provided by Mentis should be used only for review purposes and removed from reviewers' access at the end of the process. Reviewers should act in accordance with the journal’s confidentiality policy.
  1. Scientific Ethics and Citation Recommendations
  • Identifying Missing Citations: Reviewers should note any important references that are missing in the manuscript. They should examine whether the work aligns with existing literature in the field and inform authors of any necessary citations.
  • Reporting Ethical Misconduct: If reviewers detect ethical violations such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or duplicate publication, they must inform the editors immediately. Mentis places high importance on preventing scientific ethical violations.
  1. Compliance with Guidelines and Standards
  • Suitability to Mentis’s Scope: Reviewers should consider whether the work aligns with Mentis’s aims and scope. The journal supports innovative, practically applicable, and scientifically contributive studies in the field of education.
  • Language and Presentation Review: Reviewers should assess the suitability of language, clarity, and presentation in the manuscript. Works should be written in a scientific and clear language, with constructive suggestions offered to help authors improve.
  1. Revision and Final Checks
  • Following the Revision Process: Reviewers should review revisions made by authors and ensure that the suggested changes have been addressed. If the revisions are insufficient, further revision may be requested.
  • Final Check and Approval: During the final review, reviewers should verify that the work meets Mentis’s publication standards. Articles must receive final approval from reviewers before publication.
  1. Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers carry a significant responsibility in maintaining Mentis's scientific and ethical standards. Within this responsibility, reviewers are expected to:

  • Maintain confidentiality of the work,
  • Conduct impartial and scientific evaluations,
  • Promptly disclose any conflicts of interest,
  • Provide citation recommendations,
  • Offer constructive and clear feedback.

Mentis values reviewers’ adherence to these ethical principles, ensuring a trustworthy and transparent scientific process. The contributions of reviewers are invaluable in preserving and enhancing the scientific quality of Mentis, and the journal is committed to supporting reviewers at every stage of the process.