An online article evaluation and tracking system are used in our journal. In the article evaluation process, double-blind peer review based on the principle of mutual obscurity is used. The referees and authors cannot see each other's personal information during the evaluation process, and cannot communicate directly. The first uploaded evaluation format of the article does not include the names, titles, addresses, and affiliated organizations of the authors.

New manuscripts are processed within 10 days. The editor is given 7 to 10 days for each step in the evaluation process, such as control, assignment, and publication. The referee is given 7 days to respond to the invitation sent by the field editor and 15 days to evaluate. An additional period of 5 days is granted for all cases where the processing time has passed. The article evaluation period takes an average of 3 months. The evaluation period may vary according to the referee's returns. The process may take longer due to situations such as not getting timely feedback from the referees and re-appointing referees.

In our journal, the Dergi Park article evaluation process is followed. Pre-reviewed articles are reviewed by at least two (2) referees appointed by the field editors during the evaluation phase.

1. Preliminary examination

• It is checked whether there are any deficiencies in the documents/files sent to the journal.
• Articles that are not suitable for the purpose and scope of the journal are rejected.
• The compliance of the article with the journal writing rules is checked. Articles that do not comply with the Author Guidelines are sent back to the author for correction.
• A similarity scan is performed. Articles with a high similarity rate (>25%) are rejected. Articles with a high similarity rate (>=4%) belonging to a single source are sent back to the author for editing.

2. Evaluation

• The article is sent to the field editor.
• Articles not deemed sufficient by the field editor in terms of originality, quality, and/or contribution to the field may be forwarded to the editor without appointing a referee.
  
• The referee is assigned to the article by the field editor.
• The referees are given time to accept and evaluate the article. If the evaluation process is prolonged, a new referee is appointed.
• In line with the referee reports, the field editor makes a recommendation to the journal editor.
  
• The decision of the journal editor for the article is in line with the referee reports and field editor recommendation; It can be rejection, correction, or acceptance.
  - If the article is rejected, the process is terminated and the article is rejected.
  - If a correction (Major/Minor revision) is requested, the author is requested to make corrections in line with the referee's opinions. The article that receives major revisions and is corrected by the author is re-evaluated.
  -If accepted, the publication process is started for control, layout, and post-reading processes.