Double-Blind Peer Review & Evaluation Process

Double-blind peer review system is applied in our journal. The reviewers are not informed about who owns the submitted article and the author(s) are not informed about the identities of the reviewers evaluating the article. Referee reports are confidential and stored for five years. Articles that do not receive positive reports from the referees are not published and are not returned to the author(s); administrative and administrative responsibility is not accepted in this regard. Articles that are requested to be corrected by the referees are sent to the author(s) for the necessary changes. Authors heed the requests, suggestions and warnings of the referees and the editor; however, they may object to the issues they do not agree with and the decisions of the arbitrators, provided that they state their reasons. In this case, the opinion of another arbitrator is consulted. In cases where one of the referee reports is positive and the other is negative, the manuscript is sent to a third referee. It is the responsibility of the author to deliver the corrected text to the journal within the specified period. Editors/Editors are authorized to make minor corrections that are not fundamentally oriented to the articles to be published in accordance with the indexing criteria. Referees only give opinions to editors in making the final decision. The final decision belongs to the editors.
The Evaluation Process of the Articles Submitted to the Journal is as follows:
1- Submitted manuscripts are evaluated by the editor and/or members of the editorial board in terms of purpose, scope, method and writing principles. Two referees are determined by the journal editors to evaluate the article that has gone through the pre-control stage.
2- Manuscripts in accordance with the principles of publication and writing are sent to two referees known for their works and works in the field without specifying the author's name (blind refereeing) for scientific evaluation.
3- In general, the referee has time to accept the refereeing duty in a 7-day period. An extra 7 days may be given for the referee to accept the invitation. The referee who accepts the refereeing task is given 22 days to evaluate the article. At the end of the 22-day period, the referee can be given an extra 8 days. In addition to this general situation, the process of evaluating the articles uploaded to the system is accelerated as much as possible.
4- If both referees give their opinions as "It is appropriate to publish", the article will be published in the volume and number to be determined by the Editorial Board as soon as possible.
5- If both referees give their opinions as "It is not appropriate to publish", the article will not be published in the journal.
6- If one of the referees expresses a positive opinion about the publication of the article and the other has a negative opinion, the manuscript is sent to a third referee; the report of the third referee is decisive in the publication of the article.
7- Manuscripts are not returned whether they are published or not. Authors are obliged to take into account the criticisms and suggestions of the referees regarding the article they send if corrections are requested by the referees.
8- It is the responsibility of the author to deliver the corrected text to the journal within the specified period. The corrected text can be reviewed again by the referees who request the changes if necessary. Authors are not informed about the identities of the referees and referees are not informed about who the article belongs to (Blind Refereeing). Referee reports are put in the archive for storage.
9. The journal may also include book introductions and reviews, attachments to a pre-written article, reviews and comments, responses and responses. The decision regarding the publication of such articles in the journal is made by the Editor/Editorial Board/Field Editor.