Triple R employs a double-blind peer-review process, meaning the identities of the reviewers and authors are concealed from each other.
As part of the Triple R journal’s reviewing process, the following steps are taken:
1. Initial Editorial Screening: Each submitted manuscript on the journal’s site is evaluated and qualified by the editorial team and copy editor based on these criteria: (before an initial decision is made)
Including a careful review of the mentioned points, the editorial's first decision will take between one to two weeks to be made.
Manuscripts that have serious flaws and fail to meet the standards of the Triple R journal, will be rejected, and the authors will immediately be notified of the first decision of the editorial team.
If the manuscript requires some changes and modifications, it will be sent back to the authors for resubmitting their revised manuscript.
2. Invitation to Reviewers: When a manuscript passes the initial evaluation process, the confidential double-blind peer-review process will begin. Manuscripts will be sent to at least two reviewers with expertise in the respective field of the manuscript, and one reviewer for statistical aspects and research methodology evaluations.
3. Review Timeframe: It may take two to three weeks for the peer-review process to be completed.
4. Editorial Decision: The reviewers’ comments recorded on the website, which adhere to specific guidelines will be assessed by the editorial team and then compiled and uploaded to the authors’ panel to be revised by the corresponding author. The corresponding author will be asked to submit their revisions within a maximum of two weeks.
5. In cases of further required evaluations, the authors’ resubmitted manuscripts and answers to the reviewers will be sent to the reviewers to make their decision within a maximum of two weeks. If needed, the authors will have another week to answer the reviewers’ second round of review.
6. Finally, the editorial team will make a decision regarding the acceptance/rejection of the manuscript by a maximum of one week.
7. Upon acceptance of the manuscript, the letter of acceptance will be sent to the authors. The reviewers’ comments will be included in the rejection letter for the authors once the manuscript has been rejected.
8. The accepted manuscript will be sent to the copy editor and language editor. This process will take up to 30 days to be completed.
9. The galley-proof version of the manuscript will be sent to the authors. Following the completion of all necessary changes and modifications to the manuscript, the corresponding author will be requested to sign each page electronically. An updated version of the manuscript will be sent to the corresponding author if any errors are found.
10. The final version of the manuscript will be published on the Triple R website within one to two weeks.
Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential. They may not share, discuss, or use manuscript content for personal or third-party advantage. Any potential conflicts of interest must be declared, and reviewers must recuse themselves if necessary.
Triple R's peer-review process adheres strictly to the guidelines and flowcharts provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
For any questions regarding this policy, please contact the editorial office.
Authors can withdraw their articles only before they are accepted, except in cases where the article contains errors or was submitted accidentally.
In rare instances, articles may violate professional ethical codes, such as submitting multiple versions of the same work, misrepresenting authorship, or engaging in plagiarism or data falsification. If an article is deemed to be a duplicate of another published work or violates the journal's publishing ethics guidelines, it may be withdrawn.
Withdrawal Process and Stages
Pre-Review: Authors can withdraw their articles at this stage without penalty, provided they have a valid reason.
Peer-Review: Authors cannot withdraw their articles at this stage unless exceptional circumstances apply (e.g., ethical violations).
After Acceptance: Authors can only withdraw their articles if they contain significant errors or were submitted accidentally. If the author does not comply with this rule, they must pay the full Article Processing Charge (APC) for the journal.
Post-Publication: Once an article is published, it cannot be withdrawn. Instead, significant issues must be addressed through retraction or correction to maintain the scientific record's integrity.
Initiating Withdrawal: To initiate the withdrawal process, authors must submit a written request to the editorial office, explaining the reason for withdrawal and signed by the corresponding author and all co-authors.
Articles can contain errors due to honest mistakes, native language barriers, or research misconduct. If the errors are significant enough to undermine the validity of the study's findings and conclusions, the article should be retracted to correct the scientific record. If ethical breaches or major mistakes are identified, the journal will act swiftly to correct them in line with COPE standards.
Reasons for retraction can include:
-Redundant publication
-Plagiarism
-Peer review manipulation
-Unauthorized use of data or material
-Copyright infringement
-Legal issues
-Unethical research practices
-Failure to disclose competing interests.
Retractions can be initiated by the authors, institution, readers, or editor. However, disputes over authorship alone should not lead to retraction. The authors of the retraction notice should ideally be the same as the original authors, but other responsible individuals or the editor may also be included. The notice will provide details on why the article is being retracted, who requested it, and how it was discovered. The retraction will also be clearly linked to and from the original article.
Publications will be retracted as soon as possible after the editor determines that it is necessary. In cases where there is insufficient evidence, the editor may consider publishing an expression of concern instead. In rare instances, articles may be removed due to defamatory content, violation of personal privacy, or a court order. However, metadata and a retraction notice will still be available.
Authors may republish corrected work if only some parts of the original article are found to be unreliable. They will need to notify the editors of the new journal and obtain permission from the copyright holder. It is recommended to cite the original retraction notice and explain why the work was flawed and what changes have been made.
In cases where errors are considered unintentional and the underlying science remains valid, the journal may consider retraction with republication (replacement) after further review and editorial scrutiny. The extent of changes made will be documented in supplementary materials or an appendix to ensure transparency.
Retraction and Correction Policies
Retraction: Articles should be retracted to correct the scientific record if errors undermine findings, due to issues such as redundant publication, plagiarism, peer review manipulation, unauthorized data use, copyright infringement, legal issues, or undisclosed conflicts of interest.
Correction: If parts of an article are unreliable but the overall findings remain valid, a correction should be published. In cases of unintentional errors, retraction with republication (replacement) may be considered after further review.