Referee 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 properly 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 adequate 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.

Referee Process (Academic Review)
The manuscript is submitted for review by at least two referees. The review process is conducted in confidentiality within the framework of double blind reviewing. The referee is requested to either state his/her opinion and opinion on the manuscript or justify it with an explanation on the online referee form. The author is given the right to object and defend his/her views if he/she disagrees with the referee's opinions. The field editor ensures mutual communication between the author and the referee while maintaining confidentiality. If both referee reports are positive, the manuscript is submitted to the Editorial Board with a proposal to consider publication. If one of the two referees has a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third referee. Studies can be published with the positive decision of at least two referees. Translated articles are sent to language and related field experts for evaluation in terms of conformity with the original, appropriate use of field concepts and language. Translations in which the experts express a negative opinion are not published. The publication of book and symposium reviews and doctoral thesis abstracts is decided upon the evaluation of the relevant field editors. Revision Phase: If the referees request revisions to be made in the text they have reviewed, the relevant reports are sent to the author and he/she is asked to revise his/her work. Revision (At least 10 days - time may be extended if Major has requested revision). The author submits the corrections to the field editor by indicating them in red color.

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