1. After an article is uploaded to the journal system and passes the editorial check, a plagiarism report is obtained. For articles with no issues in the plagiarism report, the peer review process will be initiated.

2. Articles uploaded to the journal system must include the author's name, title, affiliated institution, department name, the city where the institution is located, and the author's ORCID code. During the peer review process, the editor removes the author information before sending the article to the reviewers.

3. Articles uploaded to the journal system are first evaluated by the editors in terms of compliance with the journal's writing and publication guidelines. If any revisions are required, the article is returned to the author with a request for corrections.

4. Articles that do not comply with the journal's writing guidelines will not be sent to reviewers.

5. Studies that do not contain scientific content or do not contribute to scientific innovation are not accepted by our journal. Such works are not included in our publication. Articles that comply with the writing and publication guidelines are sent to at least two reviewers for evaluation.

6. Reviewer and author identities are kept confidential from each other under the DOUBLE-BLIND PEER REVIEW system.

7. Reviewers have a maximum of 30 days to evaluate the articles sent to them. If a reviewer does not submit a report within this period, a new reviewer is assigned.

8. Articles that receive a POSITIVE REVIEW REPORT are accepted for publication.

9. Reviewers evaluate articles based on the following criteria. Additionally, authors have the opportunity to review the peer evaluation reports related to their work via the journal system:

• Relevance between the title and content

• Scientific value and originality

• Language and clarity of expression

• Approach and scope of the subject

• Coherence and consistency of the topic

• Use of original and primary sources

• Access to recent scientific studies and sources

• Contribution to the field

• Command of the field’s terminology

• Language, style, clarity, and fluency

• Achievement of results

10. Reviewers may request to see a revised version of the article before publication. If such a request is stated in the review report, the revised version is automatically sent to the reviewer by the system.

11. Authors may appeal the review reports within reasonable bounds and with convincing evidence. The editorial board will examine the appeal and, if deemed appropriate, may seek the opinion of a different reviewer (or reviewers).

12. Authors can track the stage of the evaluation process of their submissions through their membership accounts. The peer review process must be followed carefully. Since the system allows only one revision opportunity, all reviewer evaluations must be completed and their reports uploaded before any revisions are made.

13. Journal editors closely monitor the corrections requested by reviewers. Based on this, editors may decide whether or not to publish an article.

14. A copyright agreement is used during the submission process in the journal system. However, if deemed necessary, the editors or editorial board may request the copyright transfer agreement separately from the author(s).

15. Articles published in our journal may be used with proper citation of the journal name. Legal action will be taken against users who use published articles without proper citation. All responsibility in this matter lies with the user.

Peer Review Process