In our journal, since a double-blind peer review process is applied at every stage of the process, no information revealing the identity of the author(s), such as name, institution, acknowledgments, etc., should be included in any sections other than the cover page.

The aim of the peer review process is to ensure the publication of high-quality and original scientific studies. The peer review process for all articles published in the Harran University Journal of Sciences operates as described below.

Submitted articles are first subjected to a preliminary evaluation by the editors for compliance with the aim, scope, methodology, and writing guidelines. Suitable studies that pass this stage are evaluated by at least two independent experts in the field using the double-blind peer review system.

To maintain the objectivity of the peer review process, all potential conflicts of interest are reviewed, and no reviewer assignment is made in cases where a potential conflict of interest is identified.

A revised version, a response letter, and, if necessary, raw data/supplementary materials may be requested from the authors.

Reviewers evaluate the manuscripts sent to them based on originality, methodology, contribution to the literature, presentation of findings, support for conclusions, and utilization of previous studies. Reviewers can accept, reject the article, or request the authors to make revisions regarding form and/or content. For an article to be accepted for publication, at least two reviewers must provide a positive opinion.

If the reviewer(s) request corrections, the author(s) complete the requested corrections, taking into account the criticisms and suggestions made by the reviewers, and resubmit them to the Publication Board within 30 days at the latest.

Articles not accepted for publication are not returned to their authors.

At this stage, no article can be accepted for publication by the editor without a positive reviewer report.

The final decision lies with the editor/editorial board, and this decision is made in light of the scientifically grounded and justified recommendations contained in the reviewer reports.

The journal is conducted in accordance with TR Dizin and COPE ethical principles. Peer review reports are stored securely in digital format for a minimum of five (5) years from the date of publication.

At the discretion of the journal editorship, studies not subjected to the peer review process can be published by being clearly classified according to the relevant publication type policy.

Reviewers should inform the editor of any delay in the evaluation process, should they experience one for any reason.