Reviewer Selection

• Many factors play a role in the selection of the reviewers. Factors such as experience, suitability of the field of study are the most determining factors in the selection of the reviewer.

• The author(s) may request not to send their work to some referees because of conflict of interest.

• The reviewer list is periodically evaluated by the editorial within each issue and is updated and shared on the generic page.

• Upon their request, reviewer documents are sent to our reviewers, following the issue of the publication of the work they review.

Report Writing

• For report writing, the reviewer assessment form included in the e-mail attachment sent to the reviewers should be used.

• reviewer evaluations are expected to focus especially on these following questions;

     Does the study make an original contribution to the knowledge in the field?

     Is the study scientifically up to date?

• Reviewer reviews are expected to be critical and unbiased.

• Reviewers are expected to make a text-based assessment only, and to avoid statements about the author's / authors' inadequacies.

• In addition to the evaluation criteria, referees are expected to detail their negative opinions and state their justifications in the space next to the evaluation form.

• In particular, the reviewer who gives a negative opinion should present the weaknesses of the study and reasons for refusal to the author with his evaluations.

• The editor intervenes in the spelling mistakes in the reviewer reports, the statements that deem the author/authors inadequate, the expressions that contain vulgar or insulting or insulting, and information errors.

Assessment Process

• Reviewers are given 30 days to assess a study.

• If the referee is unable to evaluate the work within the given period, s/he may request additional time from the Editor or inform the Editor that s/he cannot assess the study due to time constraints. Thus, the author's time loss can be prevented and sufficient time is provided for the editor to appoint a new reviewer.