Initial Checks

Through the DergiPark System, the compliance of the proposed manuscript and its supplementary files with the journal's writing rules and ethical policies are examined. Details of the investigation are given below.

Full text:
Is it prepared in accordance with the article template?
Is it regulated in accordance with ethical rules?
Are the references properly arranged?

Title page:
Is it prepared according to the template?
Is the information of the authors complete?

Authors' agreement and commitment form:
Is it prepared according to the template?
Are the names and signatures of all authors included in the form?

Plagiarism report (from Turnitin or iThenticate):
Does the similarity rate exceed 20%?
If necessary, the plagiarism report is taken again by the editorial office.

Manuscripts that are not prepared properly are returned to their authors for re-recommendation. Manuscripts that pass this stage are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief.

Peer Review

The manuscript proposal that passes the first checks is assigned to the relevant Field Editor by the Editor-in-Chief. The Field Editor invites at least three scientists who are experts in their fields as reviewers for peer review. The reviewers who accept the invitation start the peer review process. Meanwhile, the authors cannot see the identities of the reviewers and the reviewers cannot see the identities of the authors. In the process, a double-blind peer review is applied.

Editorial Decision and Revision

All manuscripts recommended to our journal go through the peer review process and the process is concluded with one of the following.

Accept after minor revision:
The proposed manuscript is accepted by the field editor after it is revised according to the comments of the reviewers.

Accept or reject after major revision:
The acceptance or rejection of the proposed manuscript depends on the revisions made. The second peer review begins with a peer review that results in a major revision decision. At this stage, a detailed “response file for the reviewers” may be requested from the author. Manuscripts for which major revisions are requested are corrected by their authors to include all reviewer’s comments. The revised manuscript in line with the reviewers’ comments (minor, major, or rejection) is evaluated and decided by the relevant field editor. Again, with the reviewers' comments and the decision of the field editor, the peer review can be carried to the third round. The final decision for the outcome of corrections is made by the field editor's decision (accept or reject).

Reject:
If the reviewers’ comments indicate the existence of serious flaws during the peer review process, the manuscript proposal is rejected by the field editor.

At the revision stage, the authors can submit their detailed responses in writing to the reviewers with whom they disagree.

Production and Publication

The layout of the accepted manuscript is prepared. Articles written in Turkish and English are reviewed by language editors and edited with the approval of the authors. After the missing parts of the layout are done, the process is completed. Early views of the articles that are planned to be published are published in the beginning of April and October of each year, and their final versions are published on the web page of the journal in June and December.