Principles of the Review Process
Evaluation Principles

1) Articles that have not been previously published or are not currently under evaluation in another journal for publication and approved by each author are accepted for evaluation. An author who sends an article to our journal cannot have more than one article published in two consecutive issues and in the same year. It must be published in at least one issue.

2) In order to prevent ethical violations, articles sent to the journal are scanned in the plagiarism program (https://intihal.net/). An editor is assigned to articles that do not exceed 20%, except for the references. The similarity report is reviewed by the editor to check whether attention is paid to the "citation-citation difference". In the event that unethical situations that are not suitable for academic writing are detected in the text, the study is returned to the author(s).

3) Nüsha journal conducts a double-blind review process. The preliminary review of all studies is evaluated by the responsible editors in terms of suitability for the journal. After this stage, the study is first evaluated by the editorial board. The editorial board may decide to reject the article before the publication board. The article deemed appropriate by the editorial board is then put on the agenda of the Board to be discussed by the Editorial Board. Articles reviewed by the Editorial Board may be rejected without being reviewed by the Board's decision or sent to the evaluation of two expert referees on the subject, or to a third referee if deemed necessary.

4) Articles are evaluated independently of the authors' ethnic origin, gender, nationality, religious belief and political views. Articles submitted for publication are subject to a fair double-blind peer review.

5) The editor does not allow conflicts of interest among authors, editors, referees and editorial board members.

6) The Editorial Board and the Editorial Board are responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles.

7) Editorial Board members and editorial board members do not participate in decisions regarding articles written by themselves, their family members or their students. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's regular procedures.
8) Referees must ensure that all information regarding submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published, and if they detect any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the author's part, they must report it to the editor.

9) If the referee does not feel qualified to address the subject of the article or is unable to respond in a timely manner, they must notify the editor and request that they not be involved in the refereeing process.

10) Members of the Editorial Board must ensure that the identity of the referees remains confidential. Referees are responsible for ensuring that the content of the article remains confidential.
Evaluation Process
Articles submitted to the journal undergo formal and ethical preliminary review within 2 weeks. Studies that pass the preliminary review are first evaluated by the editorial board. Articles accepted by the editorial board are placed on the agenda of the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board decides whether or not the article will be included in the refereeing process. Referees are given 4 weeks for articles sent for refereeing, and this period can be extended by another 2 weeks if deemed necessary. The author is given two weeks for studies that require correction based on the referee reports. This period can be extended if necessary. At the end of the refereeing process, the studies are published by the decision of the Editorial Board. Afterwards, the studies are presented to the final reading editor and the language editor for review. The studies that are ready for publication are published in printed and electronic formats. The publication review process takes an average of 12 weeks. Studies are planned for the issue based on the order of their application date to the journal. It takes an average of 20 weeks for an accepted article to be assigned to the issue and published.
Refereeing Type: Double-Blind
Review Time: Pre-Publication
Author-Reviewer Interaction: Editors mediate all interactions between referees and authors. There is no direct communication between referees and authors.
Review Duration: The publication review process takes an average of 12 weeks.
Publication Duration: Studies are planned for the issue based on the order of their application date to the journal. It takes an average of 20 weeks for an accepted article to be assigned to the issue and published.
Acceptance Rate: In 2023, 58% of the articles that reached our journal were accepted for publication; 42% were rejected; In 2024, 59% of the articles were accepted for publication; 43% were rejected.

Plagiarism Control: All articles are scanned on the İntihal.net platform to prevent plagiarism.
Number of Referees Reviewing Each Article: Studies are reviewed by at least two referees.
Decision: A positive opinion from at least two referees is required for the study to be accepted. If one of the referee reports regarding the publication of the article is positive and the other is negative, the study is sent to a third referee. The editorial board makes the final decision on the article.
Suspicion of Ethical Violation: When referees suspect a violation of publication ethics in the study they are reviewing, they notify the editor. The editor carries out the necessary procedures and presents the results to the Editorial Board. The final decision regarding the study belongs to the Editorial Board.
Referee Process Principles for the Work of the Editorial Staff
Works written by one of the members of the Editorial Board and the Editorial Board are submitted to the review of at least two external referees. During this period, the role of the relevant member in the journal system is suspended. In this way, double-sided confidentiality during the review process is protected.

Responsibilities of Authors
The author must comply with research and publication training.
The author must not attempt to publish the same study in more than one journal.
The author must fully indicate the works he/she has used in the writing of the article in the references.
Responsibilities of the Editor
The editor evaluates the studies independently of the authors' ethnic origin, gender, nationality, religious belief and political views.
The editor conducts the evaluation process of the studies fairly within the scope of the double-blind referee system. During this process, all information about the articles is kept confidential.
The editor and the Editorial Board are responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication. It is their responsibility to publish a correction note or retract when necessary.
The editor does not allow any conflict of interest between the authors, the Editorial Board and the referees. They have full authority to carry out the refereeing process and the Editorial Board is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of the articles in the journal.
Referees' Responsibilities
Referees should not have any conflict of interest with the authors and/or research funders.
Referees' evaluations should be objective.
The language and style used by the referees should not offend the author.
Referees should ensure that all information about the submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published.
Referees should notify the editor if they notice a copyright violation or publication ethics violation in the work they review.
A referee who feels inadequate to review an article or who thinks that they will not be able to complete the review within the specified time should withdraw from the review process.
The referees examine the study in terms of scientific content within the scope of the questions stated below:
• Is the study scientific in terms of its subject, scope and method?
• Does the study contain original information/documents that will contribute to the field?
• Does the study critically evaluate first-hand and/or current sources and present the author's comments? Is the study successful in meeting the purpose of writing the work?
• Are the titles, abstract and conclusion sections, and the figures, tables, pictures, maps, etc. used appropriate to the content of the study?