Manuscripts submitted to our journal undergo a plagiarism check by the editor before entering the article review process. If the similarity rate is below 20% and the borrowing rate for a single source is below 2%, the editor checks the compatibility of the submitted manuscripts with the journal's publication policies and objectives.

After the editor determines the compatibility of the submitted manuscripts with the journal's publication policies and objectives, in meetings with the editorial board members (held every 15 days or monthly), it is decided to assign reviewers to the manuscripts submitted to our journal. Care is taken to ensure that the designated reviewers are experts in their respective fields and come from different universities. The relevant manuscripts are sent to at least 2 reviewers. Reviewers are given a period of 15 days for the evaluation process. These periods may be extended upon the editor's discretion in response to reviewer requests. In cases where the reviewer evaluation process is excessively delayed, the editor may consult the editorial board in the next meeting and consider changing reviewers.

Upon positive outcomes of reviewer evaluations, the editor and section editors have the right to accept or reject the relevant reviewer opinions. However, in case of rejection, the editorial board is obligated to provide the reasons for rejection to the reviewers and authors.

In cases where reviewer evaluations result in a negative (reject) decision without the intervention of the editor and section editors, the respective manuscript is rejected. Reviewers are required to justify their rejection decisions. Authors have the right to appeal a rejection decision, which will be evaluated by the editorial board.

If reviewers request revisions for the relevant manuscripts, authors are expected to address these revisions along with the relevant reviewer evaluation reports and, if available, in-text corrections. If reviewers and/or the editorial board agree that the requested revisions have not been adequately addressed, the relevant manuscript may be rejected. In cases where one reviewer issues a major revision decision and the other issues a rejection decision, the editorial board may reject the manuscript without involving a third reviewer. If one reviewer issues a minor revision decision and the other issues a rejection decision, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer. The decision to publish the manuscript is made by the editorial board based on the evaluation of the third reviewer.