Article Evaluation Policies and Peer Review Process
1. General Principles
1.1. Articles submitted to the journal must be original works that have not been previously published or are not under review in another journal, and they must be approved by all authors.
1.2. Submitted articles that pass the initial review are subjected to a plagiarism check using INTİHAL.NET software. The similarity rate must be below 20%.
1.3. After the plagiarism check, suitable articles are reviewed by the Chief Editor in terms of originality, methodology, the academic significance of the topic, and the journal’s scope.
1.4. Articles deemed appropriate for review are sent to at least two national or international reviewers under the double-blind peer review system.
1.5. The final publication decision is made by the Editorial Board after evaluating the revisions made by the authors based on the reviewers' feedback.
1.6. The entire review process takes approximately 10 weeks.

2. Responsibilities of the Editor
2.1. The editor evaluates articles solely based on their academic content, regardless of the authors’ ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religious beliefs, or political views.
2.2. The editor ensures that all submitted articles undergo an impartial double-blind peer review process and maintains the confidentiality of all information before publication.
2.3. Reviewers are reminded that the articles they evaluate must be kept confidential, and the anonymity of the reviewers is preserved.
2.4. The editor is responsible for the scientific and ethical integrity of the published content and may issue corrections or retractions when necessary.
2.5. The editor does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, reviewers, and editors.

3. Responsibilities of the Reviewers
3.1. Reviewers must conduct an independent and impartial evaluation of the article based on its subject matter.
3.2. Reviewers must not share any information regarding the articles they evaluate with third parties and must maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.
3.3. If reviewers detect copyright infringement or plagiarism in an article, they must immediately notify the editor.
3.4. If a reviewer believes they do not have sufficient expertise in the subject matter or cannot complete the review on time, they should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

4. Review Process
4.1. Articles are subjected to plagiarism screening using INTİHAL.NET software. The similarity rate must be below 20%. The initial review process takes a maximum of 20 days.
4.2. Field editors examine the articles for problematic content, academic language, and style.
4.3. Articles approved by the field editor are sent to at least two reviewers under the double-blind peer review principle.
4.4. Authors may be required to make revisions based on reviewer feedback. If one of the reviewers provides a negative review, the article is sent to a third reviewer.
4.5. After the revision process is completed, the field editor and reviewers check whether the authors have implemented the required revisions.
4.6. Articles are reviewed by Turkish and English language editors, and further corrections may be requested.
4.7. The final publication decision is made by the Editorial Board. In the event of an objection, the decision is made by a majority vote.