Referee Guide
Selcuk University Journal of Social and Technical Research aims to publish original and scientifically important articles. For this reason, we ask the referees to meticulously help in the evaluation of the article submissions we receive to our journal.
Below are suggestions on the evaluation process of the submitted manuscripts, how to become a referee and how to write a good review. We also have our refereeing terms and conditions based on the COPE Principles, which provide more information on how to conduct impartial and constructive refereeing.
Double-Blind Refereeing system has been adopted in Selcuk University Journal of Social and Technical Research.

Selection of Referees
The referees to be selected for the journal are selected from among experts who have a doctorate degree in the field of science and who have published in the relevant field. The information of the experts working in Turkish universities can be accessed from the YÖK Academic website, and the information of the experts to be selected from abroad is accessed via Publons.

Duties and Responsibilities of the Referees
1) Objectivity: Article reviews should be carried out objectively by the referees. Journal referees should act with the awareness of any personal bias that may arise and should take this thought into account when evaluating an article. Referees should clearly state the assessments that support their decisions.
2) Contribution to Editorial Decision: Peer review helps the editor to make editorial decisions and provides the author/authors with the opportunity to improve the article from different angles. In this context, it is recommended that a referee who does not feel competent in examining and evaluating an article or who thinks that he will not be able to complete the review in a short time should not accept the invitation to referee the journal.
3) Confidentiality: All articles submitted to the journal for review must be kept confidential. Journal referees should keep the evaluations and information about the article they review confidential and should not share them with anyone. It is recommended that the referees not contact the author/authors directly. The information contained in the submitted articles should not be used by the referees in their own research without the express written consent of the author(s). Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept strictly confidential and should not be used for personal gain.
4) Sensitivity to Research and Publication Ethics Violations: Referees should be extremely careful about possible ethical issues in the articles they review and should report ethical violations, if any, to the editor.
5) Conflict of Interest: If there is a possible conflict of interest between the institutions or organizations to which the authors or articles are affiliated, it is recommended that the referees do not accept to review the articles submitted in this way.
6) Request for Referee Citation: If a reviewer is to recommend that an author include citations to the reviewer's (or their partners') work, it should not be for the purpose of increasing the reviewer's citation count or increasing the visibility of their work. For the referee to recommend this, he has to base it on real scientific reasons. For detailed information, see Ethical Rules for Referees.
7) Reviewing: Article reviews and evaluations of referees must be strictly within the framework of objective rules. During the refereeing process, the referees are expected to carry out their evaluations by considering the following points.
• Does the article contain new and important information specific to the relevant field?
• Is the abstract sufficient to describe the scope of the article clearly and accurately?
• Is the method explained in a holistic and understandable way?
• Are the comments expressed in the article and the conclusions reached supported by the findings?
• Are there enough references to other studies in the field in the article?
• Is the language quality of scientific competence?
• Are the Abstract and keywords sufficient to accurately express the content of the article?

Editor's Guide
Editors' Selection
Journal editors are selected from among experts who have a doctorate degree in accordance with the scope of publication of the journal and have publications in the field in which they are authorized to review.

Türkiye Editors' Workshop Group
Selcuk University Journal of Social and Technical Research supports editors to keep in touch with other editors, with the thought that it will be beneficial for editors.

Editors' Duties and Responsibilities
Coordinating the Referee Process
Editors should ensure that the referee review and evaluation processes are fair, objective and within the specified time, and should show the necessary sensitivity in this regard. It is recommended that research articles for which applications are received are reviewed by at least two external referees and additional editorial opinion is sought when appropriate.

Selection of Referees
Journal editor; must select referees with competent expertise in the relevant field, considering the need for appropriate, inclusive, and diverse representation. The editor should avoid the selection of fraudulent reviewers and follow best practices for this.

Privacy Protection
The editor must maintain the confidentiality of all materials submitted to the journal and all contact information with the reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant article authors and journal referees. However, the editor may share information, limited to other journal editors, in exceptional circumstances and when deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct by taking the opinion of the publisher. The editor must protect the identities of the referees. It is recommended that the information contained in an article submitted to the journal should not be used in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author(s). Confidentiality of privileged information or ideas obtained during the arbitration should be ensured and should not be used for personal gain.

Impartiality
The editor should evaluate the manuscripts in terms of their intellectual content, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, citizenship, or the political opinions of the authors.

Investigation of Claims
An editor who finds strong evidence of an ethical violation should contact the Editorial Board and the Publisher to re-correct the article, withdraw the submission, or make any other revisions to the article.

Conflict of Interest
It is recommended that the editor not take part in reviews of articles written by him or his family members. In addition, if such an article exists, it must comply with all procedures of the journal. The editor should choose to follow the ICMJE guidelines for disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers.

Publication Decision
The journal editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal is suitable for publication by examining the referee evaluation reports. The editor must comply with the policies determined by the Editorial Board.

Journal Citation Request
It is recommended that the editor not affect the ranking of the journal by artificially changing or increasing the metric of any journal. The editor should not request reference to the journal's or another journal's articles for his own personal interests, other than for scientific purposes.

Correction, Withdrawal, Publication of Concern
If the editor detects some minor errors in a published article that do not affect the research findings, interpretations, and conclusions, they may suggest publishing a correction. If the editor detects errors or ethical violations in the article that would invalidate the findings and conclusions, they should consider retracting the article. Editors should issue a statement of concern if the possibility of abusive publication by authors is identified, there is strong evidence that the research findings are unreliable and the authors' affiliations did not show sufficient sensitivity to the investigation, or if the investigation appears unfair or inconclusive. In practice, COPE and ICJME guidelines are taken into account for correction, withdrawal or expression of concern.