Article Evaluation Process
Article Review Policy: Double Blind Review + Transparent Review
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 review.
2) Submitted articles that pass the preliminary check are scanned for plagiarism using the plihal.net software.
3) After the plagiarism check, the appropriate articles are evaluated by the secretary in terms of originality, methodology, importance of the subject covered and compatibility with the scope of the journal, etc.
4) Selected articles are sent to at least two national/international referees for double blind review.
5) The decision to publish is made by the Editorial Board after the edits made by the authors in line with the requests of the referees and the referee process.
6) The preliminary review and refereeing process takes an average of 6 weeks.
Editor's Responsibilities
1) The editor evaluates manuscripts for scientific content without regard to the ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, religious beliefs or political philosophy of the authors.
2) The Editor conducts a fair double-blind peer review of manuscripts submitted for publication and ensures that all information about submitted manuscripts is kept confidential before publication.
3) The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. Reviewers and the editorial board cannot discuss manuscripts with other people. The anonymity of reviewers must be ensured. In certain cases, the editor may share a reviewer's review with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.
4) The Editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication. It is also his/her responsibility to issue a correction note or withdrawal when necessary.
5) The Editor does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors and reviewers. Only the referee has full authority to appoint reviewers and is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of manuscripts in the Journal.
Responsibilities of Referees
1) Reviewers should not have any conflicts of interest related to the research, the authors and/or the research funders. Their judgment should be objective.
2) Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts is kept confidential and should notify the editor if they are aware of copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author.
3) A reviewer who feels incapable of reviewing the subject matter of an article, or who knows that immediate review will be impossible, should notify the editor and be excused from the review process.
Reviewer Process
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 consideration. Submitted articles that pass the preliminary check are scanned for plagiarism using plihal.net software. After the plagiarism check, eligible articles are evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief in terms of originality, methodology, importance of the topic covered and compatibility with the scope of the journal.
The Editor-in-Chief evaluates articles independently of the ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs and political philosophy of the authors. He/she ensures that manuscripts submitted for publication undergo fair double blind peer review.
Selected articles are sent to at least two national/international referees for evaluation.
If the referees deem necessary, changes are made by the author. The Editorial Board decides whether or not to publish the text corrected by the author.
The editor-in-chief does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors and referees. He/she has full authority to appoint referees.
Reviewers' evaluations should be objective. During the refereeing process, referees are expected to make their evaluations by taking the following points into consideration.
1) Does the article contain new and important information?
2) Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the article?
3) Is the methodology coherent and clearly defined?
4) Are the interpretations and conclusions substantiated by the findings?
5) Are sufficient references given to other studies in the field?
6) Is the language quality adequate?
Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published and should report to the editor if they notice any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author.
If the referee does not feel qualified to review 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/her 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 articles with other individuals. Care should be taken to keep the identity of the referees confidential.

Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Screening
The study is reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal's publication principles, academic writing rules, and the ISNAD Citation System. It is also subjected to a plagiarism check using the iThenticate software. The similarity rate must be below 20%. The preliminary review is completed within a maximum of 10 days.
Peer Review Process (Academic Evaluation)
The study is evaluated by at least two reviewers. The peer review process is conducted confidentially under a double-blind review system. Reviewers are asked to provide their opinions and assessments either directly on the text or through an online review form with justification. If the author disagrees with the reviewers' opinions, they have the right to object and defend their views. The field editor ensures communication between the author and the reviewers while maintaining confidentiality. If both reviewers provide a positive evaluation, the study is submitted to the Editorial Board for consideration for publication. If one of the two reviewers gives a negative assessment, the study is sent to a third reviewer. Studies can only be published if they receive at least two positive evaluations.
Translated articles are sent to language and subject matter experts for evaluation regarding their conformity to the original text, accurate use of field-specific concepts, and language quality. Translations that receive negative evaluations from experts are not published. The publication of book and symposium reviews, as well as doctoral dissertation summaries, is determined based on the evaluation of the relevant field editors.
Revision Stage
If the reviewers request revisions, the relevant reports are sent to the author, who is asked to make the necessary corrections. The revision period is at least 10 days, but it may be extended if major revisions are required. The author must highlight the revisions in red and submit them to the field editor.
Reviewer Verification
The reviewer who requested revisions checks whether the author has made the necessary corrections to the text.
Editorial Board Review
Articles that have passed technical, academic, and linguistic evaluations are reviewed by the Editorial Board, which makes the final decision on their publication. If any members raise objections, the Board decides by majority vote.
Typesetting and Layout Stage
Studies approved for publication by the Editorial Board undergo typesetting and layout adjustments to be made ready for publication.
Submission to National and International Indexes
The printed copy of the published issue is sent to reference libraries in Turkey and abroad within a maximum of 60 days, while the article metadata is submitted to relevant indexes within 15 days.