Manuscripts submitted to our journal are evaluated by double-blind refereeing method and the identities of authors and referees are kept confidential in this process.
Therefore, authors are required to remove their names when uploading their manuscripts to the system.

The article evaluation process is described in detail below:

1. Initial Evaluation Phase
• Author(s) must upload the article submission form and signed copyright form to the system in PDF format before submitting their article to the journal.
If any of these documents are missing, the article will be rejected by the editor.
• The full text of the article must be uploaded to the DergiPark system in Word format in accordance with the journal's spelling rules.
• All submitted articles are scanned to prevent plagiarism. Studies submitted for review are checked for plagiarism using Intihal.net software. The similarity rate is expected to be less than 20%.
• The editor evaluates whether the article is suitable for the scope and purpose of the journal, whether it has original value and whether it complies with the editorial policies.
• Articles deemed unsuitable by the editor are rejected and the author(s) are notified within one week at the latest.
• The eligible manuscripts are forwarded to the spell checker for preliminary evaluation.

2. Preliminary Evaluation Phase
• The manuscript forwarded by the editor to the spell checker is examined for compliance with the journal's spelling rules.
• The spell checker completes the evaluation within 7 (seven) days at the latest.
• The eligible articles are transferred to the referee assignment process.
• Articles that do not comply with the spelling rules are sent back to the author(s) and the necessary corrections are requested to be made within 10 (ten) days at the latest.
• After the corrections are completed, the article is included in the peer review process with the approval of the spell checker.

3. Referee Appointment and Evaluation Process
• At least two referees appropriate to the subject of the article are appointed to evaluate the article within 7 (seven) days at the latest.
• The referees should review the manuscripts within 15 (fifteen) days at the latest and give their opinions.
• Correction requests from referees or editors must be completed by the authors within 15 (fifteen) days. Otherwise, the article will be withdrawn from the evaluation process.
• If one referee gives a positive opinion and one referee gives a negative opinion, the article is sent to a third referee. Acceptance or rejection decision is taken in line with the decision of the third referee.
• Authors are obliged to make the corrections requested by the referees. However, in exceptional cases, the article may be accepted for publication if the author(s) base their views on academic evidence and obtain editorial approval.

4- Publication Process
• After technical, academic and linguistic reviews, the articles are typeset and edited, made ready for publication and published in the next issue.

Referee Reports
Peer reviews cover criteria such as originality, methodology, ethical appropriateness, presentation of findings and results, and contribution to the literature.
The evaluation is made within the framework of the following elements:
1. **Introduction and Literature:** The research problem, purpose, contribution to the literature, title and content compatibility are evaluated.
2. **Method:** The appropriateness of the method used, data collection and analysis process are examined.
3. **Findings:** Presentation of the findings, methods of analysis, appropriateness of tables and tests are evaluated.
4. **Evaluation and Discussion:** Discussion of the topic based on the findings, generalizability and applicability are analyzed.
5. **Conclusion and Recommendations:** The contribution of the research to the literature and recommendations for future studies are presented.
6. ** Style and Expression:** Appropriate use of academic language, APA 6 citation rules and spelling rules are examined.
7. **General Evaluation:** The holistic originality of the article and its contribution to the field are discussed.
Reviewers are not expected to directly edit the full manuscript.