Manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Computational Design (JCoDe) will undergo a double-anonymized peer review process, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to one another. Each manuscript will be evaluated by  two reviewers in the relevant field to guarantee an unbiased review.

In line with the reports from the reviewers, it is decided to publish the article, to request correction from the author within the framework of the report or to reverse the article, and the author is informed of the situation as soon as possible. In the event that one of the reviewer reports is accepted and the other is rejected, a third reviewer may be appointed for the article or the editorial board and editor reserve the authority to make the final decision on this issue without requiring a new reviewer appointment.Initially, submissions will be subject to a technical review by the editorial office to confirm compliance with the journal’s guidelines.

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements will be returned to authors with requests for technical corrections. Those that conform will be forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief for assessment of their suitability in terms of scope and quality. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable may be rejected at this stage.For suitable manuscripts, the Editor-in-Chief will collaborate with Associate Editors to assign reviewers. The Associate Editors may reject a manuscript, proceed with the peer review process, or request revisions before further review. Recommendations, based on reviewer feedback, will be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief, who will make the final decision.

Revised manuscripts will undergo reassessment, typically involving the original reviewers.The Editorial Board has the right to publish an article with a positive referee review in another issues of the journal, considering the density of articles to be published in the relevant issue. If delays occur, authors will be informed of the reasons and given the option to withdraw their manuscript.

Once the peer review process is complete, authors will receive anonymized reviewer reports and an editorial decision. Peer review reports will remain confidential and will not be publicly disclosed. Submitted material is treated as confidential and must not be used until publication. Any suspected misuse of an author’s ideas or data by a reviewer will be addressed following COPE guidelines.Authors may suggest peer reviewers during submission, but the final decision on reviewer selection rests with the handling editor.

Reviewers are required to follow COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, ensuring fairness and integrity throughout the process. To prevent manipulation, the Editorial Board adheres to COPE’s recommended flowcharts and procedures. If misconduct is suspected after publication, the matter will be handled accordingly.Potential reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest to the Editor before accepting an invitation to review. This allows the Editor to make an informed decision about their participation, ensuring transparency and integrity in the review process. Communications between Editors and reviewers are confidential and must not be shared with third parties.

REVIEW PROCEDURE

All articles submitted for evaluation must comply with the content and journal template. This eligibility is evaluated by the editor and assigned to the field editors. If the article is unsuitable for the journal template, the authors are informed as soon as possible. Field editors evaluate the conformity of the article to the field and journal writing rules. The field editor evaluation period for each article is one week. After the corrections are completed, the article is sent to the referees.

The evaluation period for referees is 15 days, and the referee evaluates and reports the article. Authors are informed about these evaluations and reports. The editorial board controls all processes. If the referees deem it necessary, they have the right to request more than one correction and to see them again after they have been corrected. After the author makes the necessary corrections, the field editors check the article and prepare it for publication.

All publication rights of accepted articles belong to the Journal of Computational Design. Articles cannot be published elsewhere, copied, or used without reference.

No fee is charged from the authors for article submission and publication in our journal.

Authors whose manuscripts require either “minor revision” or “major revision” will receive a decision letter from the Editor-in-Chief. This letter will detail the reviewers’ and editors’ feedback and provide a deadline for submitting the revised manuscript. Minor revisions must be uploaded to the DergiPark system no later than 10 days after the referee returns. This period is 15 days for major revisions.

Along with the revised manuscript, authors should also submit a revision note. This document should address each reviewer’s comment individually, clearly indicating the changes made in the manuscript (with each comment followed by the author’s response and the corresponding line numbers). An annotated version of the main manuscript highlighting the changes should also be provided. The revision note should be submitted as a Word document in the Dergipark Platform.

Revised manuscripts must be submitted within the specified timeframe. If the revised manuscript is not submitted by the deadline, it may result in the withdrawal of the revision option. Authors requiring additional time should request an extension before the given deadline expires.

REVIEWER RESPONSIBILITIES

The peer-review process assists the editor and editorial board in making the editor’s decisions.

A reviewer who knows he is not qualified to review the research or cannot complete the evaluation within the specified time should notify the editor and not be involved in the review process.

The reviewers should keep the information or ideas obtained in the evaluation confidential and not use the materials in the article in their research. There should not be any conflict of interest. They should evaluate articles regardless of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, citizenship, or political philosophies. Evaluation of the work should be done objectively, and the opinions in this evaluation should be expressed with supporting documents.

Reviewers should determine whether citations in the article are cited in references. They must report any significant similarity or overlap with previously published articles.

EDITOR RESPONSIBILITIES

The editor evaluates articles regardless of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, citizenship, or political philosophies and decides which articles will be published in the journal. The decision should be appropriate to the article’s accuracy, validity, and importance and the journal’s scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism must be considered.

Editors ensure that all information about the submitted manuscript is kept confidential until it is published. In the process, editors should not allow a conflict of interest or competition between authors, editors, and reviewers.

Materials in a submitted article cannot be used in the editor’s research without the author’s express written permission. 

AUTHOR RESPONSIBILITIES

Authors should accurately describe the work done and objectively discuss its importance. An article should contain the necessary details and references to allow citation of the work.

Authors should ensure that their work is original, and if other work is used, it should be cited appropriately. All sources used in the study should be cited. Plagiarism constitutes any unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Authors may be required to submit raw data in connection with an article for editorial review, and this data must be stored for a reasonable time after publication.

Authors must not have submitted the same work for publication or consideration in another journal, and submitting the same study to multiple journals simultaneously is considered unethical behavior.

Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to work. All contributors must be listed as co-authors, and the corresponding author ensures that all contributing authors are included in the list of authors.

PLAGIARISM AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT

The author should upload a similarity report (via Turnitin or iThenticate) with the article. The similarity included here must be less than 20%. If the rate is more than 20%, the article is returned to the author and editing is requested. If the similarity rate is still high, the journal has the right to reject the article. When referencing the work of others or your own prior research, it is essential to properly cite the material in every instance. Authors are strongly encouraged to avoid all forms of plagiarism and ethical misconduct, including but not limited to the following:

• Citation Manipulation: The unethical practice of artificially boosting citation counts through excessive self-citation, over-citation of articles from the same journal, or adding honorary or unnecessary citations.
• Self-Plagiarism (Text Recycling): Reusing content or sentences from one’s previous publications without proper attribution, which constitutes plagiarism due to the lack of acknowledgment of prior work.
• Salami Slicing: Dividing a single substantial research project into smaller, less significant articles to exaggerate the novelty or significance of findings.
• Data Fabrication: Creating and presenting data that were never actually generated during research or experimentation, a severe breach of research ethics.
• Data Manipulation/Falsification: Altering or misrepresenting research data to distort the study’s outcomes, such as editing images, excluding inconvenient results, or modifying data points.

 PRIVACY STATEMENT 

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

CHANGE OF AUTHORSHIP

Changing the author responsibilities of a work whose evaluation process has begun (such as adding an author, changing the order of authors, or removing an author) cannot be proposed.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

All studies submitted for publication should be disclosed if any, and their relationships may constitute a conflict of interest. Authors are required to declare any relationships or interests that could potentially influence or bias their work. This disclosure must be submitted through the online system during manuscript submission.

The Journal of Computational Design (JCoDe) also mandates that individuals participating in the peer review process disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could result in bias.

The Editorial Board will address any cases of potential conflicts of interest involving editors, authors, or reviewers in accordance with the applicable COPE flowcharts.