Evaluation Process

(1) Submitted articles are evaluated by one of the journal editors assigned according to the subject of submission before being submitted to the referees. In this context, the editor evaluates the article
• Compliance with the scope of the journal,
• Compliance with publication principles and publication ethics,
• With its scientific quality and originality
• Formal and general content adequacy is evaluated.
• Ithenticate and Turnitin programmes are used for similarity screening. At the article submission stage, the similarity should be at a maximum of 20%, excluding citations and bibliography.

(2) The editor receives the opinion of the Editorial Board within the scope of preliminary evaluation. The article is forwarded to two members of the editorial board who are experts in the relevant subject and an internal referee application is carried out. In line with the suggestions of the editorial board members, the editor may carry out the double blind review process or rejection of the relevant article. The preliminary control of the articles sent to the journal, the appointment of referees and the decision to publish according to the referee evaluations are made by the Editor.

(3) Articles that are deemed appropriate at the preliminary evaluation stage are assigned to referees related to their field. Unsuitable articles are rejected by the Editor and the author is informed accordingly.

(4) At the referee evaluation stage; referees carry out their evaluations on the full text added to the system by the authors and without any statement about the author(s) of the article.

(5) Each referee completes the Referee Evaluation Form and carries out his/her evaluation according to the evaluation criteria in the form and submits the evaluation result (rejection, acceptance, correction, comprehensive correction) to the Editor within the specified period.

(6) A double blind peer review system is used in the evaluation of articles submitted to the journal. Two referees who are competent in their fields are appointed according to the subject of the article. The referees evaluate the suitability of the article for publication and record their suggestions for changes to be made on the form template. The referees can choose to accept the article without changes, accept it with minor changes, request major changes and resubmission, or reject the article. In case of a request for changes from the referees, the article should be revised by the author in line with the recommendations made. In cases where the referees request minor changes, they may choose to see the manuscript again or declare that the manuscript can be accepted after the changes have been checked by the field editors. If extensive changes are requested, the article is re-evaluated by the field editor after the changes made by the author and returned to the referees for control. Authors are required to process the changes made as a result of the referee evaluations on the ‘Referee Response Form’ and upload it to Dergipark. If the revisions made by the author are approved by the referee and the Editorial Board, the article is accepted. Articles that receive negative feedback from the referees are not published. In order for the articles to be published in our journal, at least two referees must make a publishable decision.

(7) When a ‘Correction’ decision is taken for the submitted articles, the authors are required to make the necessary corrections within the given period and upload the final version of the article to the system. If the corrections are not made and submitted within the specified period, the Editor has the right to reject the article.

(8) The author(s) shall take into account the criticisms, suggestions and corrections of the referees and the Editorial Board. If they disagree, they have the right to state their reasons.

(9) The similarity rate of the articles submitted to the journal is evaluated during the article upload process by using Ithenticate and Turnitin programmes. Articles with a similarity rate of 20% or more, excluding citations and bibliography, are not evaluated and sent to the author. For plagiarised manuscripts detected after publication, a removal procedure is applied and an Editor's Note is published in the journal for readers.

(10) The manuscripts whose referee process is completed are examined by the Language Editors and, if necessary, the author is asked to make corrections.

(11) The manuscripts, which are decided to be published, are typeset and edited and made ready for publication and sent to the author for review.

(12) The data of the published issue is sent to the relevant indexes within 15 days.

NOTE: Articles written by our journal's own editors are sent to at least two external referees within the scope of blind review. During this period, the roles of those editors are suspended and the double blind review process is maintained.