Evaluation Principles
1) Manuscripts that have not been previously published or are not currently under review for publication in another journal and approved by each author are accepted for evaluation.
2) Submitted articles are scanned for plagiarism using Intihal.Net software.
3) Our journal conducts a double blind review process. All manuscripts will first be evaluated by the editor for suitability to the journal. Manuscripts deemed appropriate are sent to at least two independent expert referees to assess the scientific quality of the manuscript.
4) The editor evaluates manuscripts independently of the ethnicity, gender, nationality, religious beliefs and political philosophy of the authors. He/she ensures that manuscripts submitted for publication undergo a fair double blind peer review.
5) The editor does not allow conflicts of interest between authors, editors and referees.
6) The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles. The editor's decision is final.
7) Editors are not involved in decisions about manuscripts written by themselves or by family members or colleagues, or that relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures.
Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published, and should report to the editor if they discover any copyright infringement or plagiarism on the part of the author.
If the referee does not feel qualified in the subject matter of the manuscript or is unlikely to be able to provide timely feedback, he/she should inform the editor and ask him/her not to involve him/herself in the review process.
During the review process, the editor should make it clear to reviewers that manuscripts submitted for review are the private property of the authors and that this is a privileged communication. Reviewers and editorial board members may not discuss manuscripts with other individuals. Care should be taken to keep the identity of the reviewers confidential.

The manuscripts to be submitted to the journal should be prepared in accordance with the spelling rules determined by the journal.

Preliminary Control Process

A plagiarism scan is performed through the Intihal.net programme and the similarity rate is expected to be maximum 15%.

Studies submitted for publication in the journal are reviewed by the editorial board. It is checked whether the study complies with the spelling rules and word template determined by the journal and the study is sent to the author to complete the deficiencies, if any. The corrections made by the author are examined and it is followed whether the necessary arrangements have been made. If the manuscript is found appropriate, the manuscript is sent to the language editor for Turkish-English language control. In order to initiate the referee process, the study is first evaluated by the field editor and then the referee evaluation process is initiated.

Referee Evaluation Process

The referee process of the manuscript reviewed by the field editor is initiated within the framework of double blind refereeing. The referees determined to evaluate the study are requested to state their opinions in detail in the online article evaluation form and to indicate the necessary corrections or express their opinions in the referee copies sent to them.

Referees who agree to evaluate the study are also deemed to have undertaken that they will not use the study for their own interests and will not share any information or documents related to the study with a third party.

At least two referees must send a positive report for the publication of the manuscript submitted for publication in the journal and included in the referee process. In case of a positive report from one referee and a negative report from the other referee during the evaluation process of the study, a third referee is appointed and the study is published or not published in the journal in accordance with the reports of the referees.

The study is sent to the author for the correction requests of the referees who suggest revisions for the relevant study. The author makes the corrections specified by the referee, marks them and completes the revision.

The editorial board reviews the revised manuscript and checks whether the necessary corrections have been made. If the referee who suggested the revision wants to see the manuscript again, the manuscript is sent to the referee for re-evaluation after the revision. If the referee approves the revision, the study can be published in the journal.

Authors' Responsibilities
The author must comply with research and publication training.
The author should not attempt to publish the same work in more than one journal.
The author should indicate the works used in the writing of the article in the bibliography.

Responsibilities of the Editor
The editor evaluates manuscripts for scientific content without regard to the ethnic origin, gender, citizenship, religious belief or political opinion of the authors.
The editor conducts fair double-blind peer review of manuscripts submitted for publication and ensures that all information about submitted manuscripts is kept confidential before publication.
The editor informs the reviewers that the manuscripts are confidential information and that this is a privileged interaction. Reviewers and the editorial board cannot discuss manuscripts with other people. The anonymity of the referees must be ensured. In certain cases, the editor may share a reviewer's review with other reviewers to clarify a particular point.
The editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication. It is also his/her responsibility to issue a correction note or retraction when necessary.
The editor does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors and referees. He/she has full authority only to appoint referees, and the Editorial Board is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of manuscripts in the journal.

Responsibilities of Reviewers
Reviewers should not have any conflicts of interest related to the research, authors and/or research funders.
Reviewers' evaluations should be objective.
The language and style used by the referees should not offend the author.
Reviewers should ensure that all information regarding the submitted manuscripts remains confidential until the manuscript is published.
Reviewers should notify the editor if they notice copyright infringement or plagiarism in the work they review.
A reviewer who feels inadequate in reviewing an article or who feels that he/she cannot complete the review within the specified time should withdraw from the review process.
During the review process, reviewers are expected to consider the following points: Does the article contain new and important information? / Does the abstract clearly and properly describe the content of the article? / Is the methodology described in a coherent and understandable manner? / Are the interpretations and conclusions substantiated by the findings? / Are adequate references given to other studies in the field? / Is the language quality adequate?