Principles of Review
1) Articles that have not been previously published or are not currently under review in another journal for publication and that are approved by each author are accepted for evaluation.
2) Submitted and pre-checked articles are scanned for plagiarism using Ithenticate software.
3) SEBED conducts a double blind review process. All articles will first be evaluated by the editor for suitability to the journal. The articles deemed appropriate are sent to at least two independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the article.
4) The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the articles independently of the authors' ethnic origin, gender, nationality, religious belief and political philosophy. He/she ensures that the articles submitted for publication undergo a fair double-blind peer-review.
5) The Editor-in-Chief does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors and reviewers.
6) The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of the articles. Editor's decision is final.
7) Editors are not involved in decisions about articles written by themselves, their 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.
8) Reviewers should ensure that all information regarding the submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published, and should report any copyright infringement and plagiarism on the part of the author to the editor.
9) In the evaluation process, the editor clearly states that the articles sent to the reviewers for review are the private property of the authors and this is a privileged communication. Reviewers and editorial board members cannot discuss articles with other people.
10) Care must be taken to keep the identities of the reviewers confidential.

Review Process
Reviewering Type: Double-Blind Review
Double-Blind Review (Double-Blinding): After plagiarism check, eligible articles are evaluated by the editor-in-chief for originality, methodology, importance of the topic covered, and compatibility with the scope of the journal. The editor ensures that the articles go through a fair double-blind review and, if the article complies with the formal principles, it is submitted to the evaluation of at least two reviewers from Turkey and / or abroad, and if the reviewers deem it necessary, the editors approve the publication after the requested changes are made by the authors.
Review Period: The initial decision for research articles submitted to the peer review process of SEBED is 20 days. The time taken for article acceptance is approximately 4-6 months. This period indicates the anticipated time. Authors should be aware that this time may take longer depending on reviewer feedback and other processes.
Decision: In order for the article to be accepted for publication by the Editor, at least two reviewers must make an acceptance decision.
Suspected Ethical Violation: Reviewers should inform the Editor if they suspect misconduct in the research or publication. The editor is responsible for carrying out the necessary actions in accordance with COPE recommendations.

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

Editor's Responsibilities
The editor evaluates the articles in terms of scientific content, regardless of the ethnic origin, gender, citizenship, religious belief or political opinion of the authors.
The editor makes a fair double-blind peer-review of the articles submitted for publication and ensures that all information about the submitted articles is kept confidential before publication.
The editor informs the reviewers that the articles are confidential and this is a privileged interaction. The reviewers and editorial board cannot discuss the articles with other people. Anonymity of reviewers must be ensured. In certain cases, the editor may share one 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 implement a retraction when necessary.
The editor does not allow any conflict of interest between authors, editors and reviewers. He/she has full authority only to appoint reviewers, and the Editorial Board is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of the articles in the journal.

Responsibilities of the Reviewers
Reviewers should not have any conflicts of interest regarding the research, authors and/or research funders.
The evaluations of the reviewers should be objective.
The language and style used by the reviewers should not offend the author.
Reviewers should ensure that all information regarding submitted articles remains confidential until the article is published.
Reviewers should notify the editor if they notice copyright infringement or plagiarism in the study they are reviewing.
A reviewer who feels inadequate in reviewing an article or who thinks that he/she will not be able to complete the review within the specified time should retract from the review process.
During the reviewering process, the reviewers are expected to make their evaluations by considering the following points: Does the study focus on a specific problem? Does the study have a unique contribution to the field? Is the method used in the study appropriate? Has the author answered the research question in the study? Does the study fit the scope of the journal?

Preliminary Review and Plagiarism Check
The study is reviewed by the editor for compliance with the journal's publication principles, academic spelling rules and APA Citation System, and is scanned for plagiarism using the iThenticate programme. The preliminary review is completed within a maximum of 15 days. The plagiarism similarity rate must be less than 15%. If the similarity rate is 1% but citation and quotation are not carried out properly, plagiarism is still in question.

Peer-Review Process (Academic Evaluation)
After being reviewed by the field editor, the article is submitted to the evaluation of at least two external reviewers who have doctoral theses, books or articles on the subject. The review process is carried out in confidentiality within the framework of double-blind review.

Data Submission to National and International Indexes
The data of the published issue is sent to the relevant indexes within 15 days.