1. Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Inclusive Educational Research (JOINER) follows a double-blind peer review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, and scientific integrity of published research.

Under this model, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.

1.1. Initial Editorial Evaluation

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editorial team to determine their suitability for the journal.

During this stage, manuscripts are assessed for compliance with the journal's aims and scope, author guidelines, originality requirements, and publication ethics policies.

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be rejected before external peer review.

1.2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully complete the initial evaluation are normally assigned to two qualified reviewers with relevant academic expertise.

Reviewers assess manuscripts independently, considering their scientific contribution, methodological quality, originality, clarity, relevance, and compliance with ethical standards.

Throughout the process, the journal maintains the confidentiality of authors' and reviewers' identities.

Reviewer Evaluation Process

The Journal of Inclusive Educational Research (JOINER) employs a standardized reviewer evaluation form to ensure consistency, objectivity, and academic rigor throughout the peer review process.

Reviewers assess submitted manuscripts according to established academic evaluation criteria and provide constructive feedback and recommendations to support editorial decision-making.

1.3. Reviewer Recommendations and Editorial Decisions

Reviewers provide reasoned evaluations and recommendations concerning the suitability of manuscripts for publication.

When the reviewers provide conflicting recommendations, an additional reviewer may be appointed to support the editorial decision-making process.

Based on the reviewers' reports and the editorial evaluation, a manuscript may be accepted, returned for minor or major revisions, or rejected.

The final decision regarding publication is made by the journal's editorial team.

1.4. Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to address the reviewers' comments carefully and provide a revised manuscript together with appropriate responses.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

Acceptance is not guaranteed following revision and depends on whether the manuscript adequately satisfies the academic and editorial requirements of the journal.

1.5. Confidentiality and Ethical Standards

All manuscripts submitted for peer review are treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers are expected to conduct their evaluations objectively, constructively, and professionally. They must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could compromise the impartiality of their assessments.

The journal's peer review procedures are guided by internationally recognized principles of publication ethics, including recommendations provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

2. Publication Ethics and Malpractice

JOINER follows the ethical guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to uphold the principles of academic integrity, originality, confidentiality, and impartiality. Research misconduct, including data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, and unethical authorship practices, is not tolerated.

3. Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

All submitted manuscripts are subject to similarity screening using plagiarism detection software. Similarity reports are evaluated by the editorial team to identify potential plagiarism and inappropriate text reuse. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct may be rejected.

4. Copyright and Licensing

Authors are required to submit a signed Copyright and Author Agreement. Published articles are made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, allowing non-commercial sharing with appropriate attribution and without distribution of modified versions.

5. Research Ethics and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must obtain ethical approval and informed consent when required and disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Editors and reviewers are also expected to declare conflicts that may affect their impartiality. All research involving human participants must comply with applicable ethical standards.

6. Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Authors must disclose the substantive use of generative AI tools in manuscript preparation. AI tools cannot be listed as authors, and human authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their work. 

7. Corrections and Retractions

JOINER is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. Significant errors or ethical concerns identified after publication will be investigated in accordance with COPE guidelines. When necessary, corrections or retraction notices will be published and linked to the original articles.

8. Complaints and Appeals

Authors and readers may submit complaints, concerns about publication ethics, or appeals against editorial decisions to the journal's editorial office. All complaints and appeals will be evaluated fairly, confidentially, and impartially, with consideration given to relevant evidence and potential conflicts of interest.