Reviewer Guidelines
Evaluation of the reviewed articles with "Blind Refereeing" for objective and independent examination increases the quality of publication and provides confidence. For this reason, the principle of double-blind refereeing is applied in the article evaluation process in our journal. In our journal, the author(s) and referees cannot communicate directly with the articles under review. The evaluations and comments of the referees are carried out through the journal management system. The evaluation forms of the referees and their opinions on the text of the article are sent to the authors by the editor. The reviewer's completion of the evaluation process objectively, independently and ethically should be followed by the editor.
The referees of our journal should have the following ethical responsibilities:
- Referees must fulfill their ethical responsibilities during the article evaluation process.
- Reviewers must agree to review studies related to their field. They should not review articles outside their field.
- Reviewers must comply with the article evaluation period.
- Reviewers must complete the article evaluation process with impartiality and confidentiality.
- Referees can evaluate the evaluation process based on gender, religion, political, commercial conflicts, citizenship, etc. should be carried out objectively, regardless of personal characteristics. These personal characteristics should not affect the decisions of the referees. The evaluation process should be completed objectively.
- When the referees think that they are facing a conflict of interest during the article evaluation process, they should refuse to evaluate the article and inform the journal editor about it.
- Reviewers should use a polite/constructive language and style when evaluating the article they have reviewed. They should avoid offensive, insulting, insulting, slanderous and hostile comments and expressions.
- The referees can use the content of the studies they have reviewed only after they are published, in accordance with the confidentiality principle. They cannot use any information from rejected studies.
- Reviewers may suggest citations that will contribute scientifically to the author(s) work. However, referees should not make suggestions in order to increase the number of citations.
- Reviewers should not access information about the identity of the author(s). If the author(s) information is accessed or received, the evaluation process should be terminated.
- The referees should be aware of the personal biases that may occur in the refereeing process and should take this into account when reviewing the article.
- Referees should write their reasons clearly and in detail in the referee's report for the articles they will reject.