Evaluation Principles
1) Manuscripts that have not been previously published or are not currently under review for publication in another journal and approved by each author are accepted for evaluation.
2) Submitted and pre-checked articles are scanned for plagiarism using Intihal.net software. Articles with a similarity rate of 20% or less are accepted.
3) Our journal conducts a double blind review process. All manuscripts will first be evaluated by the editor for suitability to the journal. The eligible manuscripts are sent to at least two independent expert referees to evaluate the scientific quality of the manuscript.
4) The Editor-in-Chief evaluates manuscripts independently of the ethnic origin, gender, nationality, religious beliefs and political philosophy of the authors. He/she ensures that the manuscripts submitted for publication undergo a fair double blind peer review.
5) The editor-in-chief does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors and referees.
6) The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles. The editor's decision is final.
7) Editors are not involved in decisions about manuscripts written by themselves or by family members or colleagues, or that relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures.
Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published, and should report to the editor if they discover any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author.
If the referee does not feel qualified in the subject matter of the manuscript or is unlikely to be able to provide timely feedback, he/she should inform the editor and ask him/her not to involve him/herself in the review process.
During the review process, the editor should make it clear to reviewers that manuscripts submitted for review are the private property of the authors and that this is a privileged communication. Reviewers and editorial board members may not discuss manuscripts with other individuals. Care should be taken to keep the identity of the reviewers confidential.

Referee Process Principles for the Work of the Editorial Staff
Editorials and analyses written by our journal's own editors are not subject to external peer review. Original research articles are sent to at least two external reviewers as blind reviewers. During this period, the roles of those editors are suspended.

Preliminary Review Plagiarism Scan
The articles uploaded to the journal are first subjected to preliminary review by the journal secretariat. If the article complies with the journal's publication policy, spelling rules and the similarity scan result is 20% or less, it is sent to the editor. If it is not suitable, it is either returned to the author. If there are deficiencies in the submitted work in terms of journal spelling rules, these deficiencies can be completed by the secretariat or sent to the responsible author with a request for correction.

The articles uploaded to the journal are scanned for plagiarism using the Intihal.net programme. The similarity rate must be less than 20%. If the similarity rate is 1%, but citation and quotation are not done properly, plagiarism may still be in question. In this respect, citation and quotation rules must be known and carefully applied by the author:

Citation/Indirect Quotation: If a citation is made to an opinion, discussion or determination in a source and the cited opinion is put on the line with the citing researcher's own words, a footnote mark (1) should be placed at the end of the sentence. If the reference is to a certain page or page range of the work, the page number should be given. If there is a reference to the entire work, that is, if the reference is made to a degree that requires the reader to examine the entire work, the source should be indicated in the footnote after the phrase ‘bk. on this subject’, ‘bk. about this opinion’, ‘bk. about this discussion’ or just ‘bk.’.

Quotation/Iquotation: If the relevant part of the source is taken exactly as it is, without touching the point and comma, the quoted part is ‘given in double quotation marks’ and the source is indicated by giving the footnote number1 at the end. Quotations that exist in the directly quoted text are written using ‘single quotation marks’. If the directly quoted part is longer than three lines (more than forty words), it is shown in a separate paragraph. In order to distinguish long quotations from the main text, it should be preferred to write in a font size one smaller than the normal text size and to indent the entire paragraph from the left at the beginning of the line. In direct quotations, some words, sentences and paragraphs may be omitted, provided that they do not change the meaning. Ellipses (...) are placed in place of the omitted parts. It is not correct to write the part quoted verbatim from a source without enclosing it in ‘double quotation marks’ and to be contented with just writing the source at the end. If these rules are not followed, the author may be accused of violation of publication ethics (Plagiarism).

Field Editor Review
The manuscript that passes the Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Scanning stage is examined by the relevant field editor in terms of problematic and academic language and style. At this stage, the editor may send the article to the responsible author to complete the deficiencies.

Referee Process (Academic Evaluation)
After the review of the field editor, the manuscript is sent to at least 2 referees with a double-blind refereeing system. If the referees cannot evaluate the manuscript within the given period (7 days for acceptance/rejection and 15 days for evaluation) for any reason, a new referee is appointed. Additional time can be given for evaluation upon the request of the referee. If 2 rejection reports are given as a result of the referee evaluations, the article is rejected in accordance with the referee reports. In case of one rejection and one acceptance report, the article is sent to the 3rd referee. If the Field Editor deems necessary, he/she may also send the article to the 3rd referee even if there are 2 acceptance reports. In order for the articles submitted to our journal to be published, at least two referees must give a publishable report.

Proofreading Phase
If the referees request corrections to be made in the text they have reviewed, the relevant reports are sent to the author and the author is asked to correct his/her work. The author makes the corrections in the Word program with the ‘Track Changes’ feature turned on or indicates the changes in the text in red. Submits the corrected text to the field editor.

Field Editor Control
The field editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections to the text.

Referee Check
The reviewer checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text.

Language Control and Typesetting and Layout Stage
The completed Turkish articles are accepted for publication by the editor and sent to the final reader for abstract control. The spelling control of the articles written in English is carried out by the foreign language editor before coming to the editor. If deemed necessary by the editor, the article received from the proofreader is sent back to the corresponding author and then to the layout editor. The DOI number is assigned to the articles whose layout is completed by the editor-in-chief and assigned to the new issue. The new issue is first published as ‘in early view’ and then as ‘in publication’.

Data Submission to National and International Indexes
The data of the published issue is sent to the relevant indexes within 15 days.