Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to TAZKIYA: Journal of Psychology are evaluated through an editorial screening process and, when considered suitable, undergo peer review by qualified experts in the relevant field. The review process supports the editorial team in assessing the manuscript's originality, methodological rigor, relevance to psychology, and contribution to scientific knowledge.

Upon submission, the editorial team conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript aligns with the journal's focus and scope, follows the author guidelines, and meets the basic requirements for scholarly publication. The initial screening may also consider the manuscript's originality, completeness, research relevance, and compliance with publication ethics.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's requirements or fall outside its scope may be returned to the authors for improvement or rejected without proceeding to external review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to reviewers whose academic expertise and research experience are relevant to the subject of the submission. Reviewers are expected to provide an independent, objective, and constructive assessment of the manuscript.

The editorial team considers the suitability of reviewers and any potential conflicts of interest before assigning a manuscript for review.

TAZKIYA applies a double-blind peer-review model, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during the review process. This approach is intended to support fairness and reduce potential bias in the evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

Authors should ensure that identifying information is removed from the manuscript file prepared for anonymous review. Reviewers must assess the work on its scholarly merits and maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and review materials.

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on relevant scholarly and ethical considerations, including:

• Relevance to the focus and scope of TAZKIYA Journal of Psychology.
• Originality and contribution to psychological knowledge and practice.
• Clarity of the research objectives and the theoretical foundation.
• Appropriateness of the research design, methods, data analysis, and interpretation.
• Coherence of the discussion and conclusions in relation to the findings.
• Quality of academic writing, organization, and presentation.
• Compliance with research integrity and publication ethics.

After considering the reviewers' comments and recommendations, the editor makes an editorial decision. The possible outcomes may include:

• Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication, subject to any remaining editorial requirements.
• Minor Revision: The authors are asked to make limited changes before further editorial consideration.
• Major Revision: The authors are asked to address substantial concerns and resubmit the revised manuscript for further evaluation.
• Reject: The manuscript is not accepted for publication.

The final decision rests with the editor in accordance with the journal's editorial policies. A positive recommendation from a reviewer does not automatically guarantee acceptance.

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to address the reviewers' and editor's comments carefully. Authors should provide a revised manuscript and a clear, point-by-point response explaining how each comment has been addressed. Where a suggestion has not been adopted, the authors should provide a reasoned explanation.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editor, depending on the nature of the revisions. Further revisions may be requested when necessary before a final decision is made.

Manuscripts submitted for review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, reproduce, or use unpublished material for personal or professional advantage. Information obtained through peer review must not be disclosed to unauthorized parties.

Reviewers should disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality and decline assignments when they cannot provide an objective assessment. Editors are also expected to manage submissions fairly and avoid conflicts that could compromise editorial independence.

The duration of the review process may vary depending on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, and the number of revision rounds required. The editorial team seeks to manage submissions efficiently while ensuring that manuscripts receive appropriate scholarly evaluation.