Selection of the Reviewer
Reviewers are selected from among experts who have a doctorate degree in the field of science related to the article and have publications.

Duties and Responsibilities of the Reviewer
1. Reviewers should agree to review studies related to their area of expertise.
2. Reviewers should review with impartiality and confidentiality.
3. If the reviewer does not consider themselves expert enough on the subject of the study, are able to review only some of them, or if it does not seem possible to provide a timely response, they should inform the editor about this situation and ask him not to involve himself in the reviewing process.
4. Reviewers should adopt the double-blind peer review process and fulfill the requirements of this process.
5. When reviewers realize that there is a conflict of interest between the authors or others, they should refuse to review the manuıscript and inform the editors.
6. If the reviewer detects errors in the studies sent to them and this error invalidates the study or important parts of it, it contains plagiarism, it is unethical, they are responsible for informing the editors about this issue.
7. Reviewers should make the reviewing in accordance with academic etiquette, in a constructive language, and avoid personal comments that include insults and hostility.
8. Reviewers should review the manuscript they accept within the time limit. It should give a positive or negative response within the time interval specified in the DergiPark system.
9. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the study and reviewing process.

Reviewing Process
During the reviewing process, the reviewers are expected to consider the following points.
• Does the article contain any new and important information?
• Does the abstract clearly and properly describe the content of the article?
• Is the method comprehensively and clearly defined?
• Are the comments and conclusions made substantiated by the findings?
• Are adequate references given to other studies in the field?
• Is the language quality adequate?
• Does the abstract and /keywords accurately reflect the content of the article?

Selection of the Editor
Editors are selected from among researchers and experts who are suitable for the publication scope of the journal.

Editors' Ethical Responsibilities
1. Editors are responsible for reviewing works regardless of the authors' ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs, and political philosophy.
2. Editors have full responsibility and authority to accept or reject a manuscript. It is authorized to consider the original value of the study, its contribution to the field, the validity and reliability of the research method, the clarity of the study, and the purpose and scope of the journal when making a positive or negative decision about the studies.
3. Editors are responsible for the overall quality of the content and publication. They have the authority to publish an error page or make corrections when necessary.
4. Editors are responsible for being the liaison between the author and the reviewer and communicating with everyone involved in the publication process.
5. Editors should keep the reviewers anonymous and prevent plagiarism/fake data. It is responsible for implementing the blind reviewing and publication process policies, which are among the publication policies of the journal.
6. Editors have the authority to withdraw the manuscript in question if they detect an error and that error invalidates the study or important parts of it, contains plagiarism, is unethical.
7. Editors do not allow conflict of interest between authors and reviewers. They consider whether there is a conflict of interest between the reviewer and the author(s).
8. The editors make it clear that the author information of the manuscripts submitted for review to the reviewers is confidential and this is a privileged communication.
9. Editors ensure that each manuscript is reviewed impartially and in due time.
10. Editors are responsible for keeping the identity of the reviewer confidential.
11. Editors submit the studies taking into account the expertise of the reviewer , and are responsible for making the review impartially and independently.
12. Editors strive to continuously improve the journal and increase its publication quality.
13. Editors have the right not to accept non-scientific and non-academic reviews.
14. Editors take into account the consistent criticisms of the studies published in the journal, and give the right to reply to the author(s) of the criticized manuscript.