Articles submitted to Kafkas University Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences (KAUJEASF) via the DergiPark system are first subjected to the pre-editorial control of the editor, field editor and assistant editors. At this stage, which is an internal review, first of all, the suitability of the study to the journal's field of publication and publication ethics / principles, as well as the complete application of the journal's writing rules and the adequacy of the study within the framework of the journal's publication standards are examined.

PRE-EDITORIAL CONTROL (INTERNAL REVIEW)

At the internal review stage, the editor first checks that the submitted manuscript complies with the journal's purpose, scope and editorial policy. Subsequently, articles deemed appropriate by the editor are forwarded to assistant editors and field editors for pre-editorial control. At the pre-editorial control stage, one assistant editor and one field editor are appointed as internal reviewers for each submitted article according to their areas of expertise.

In the internal review stage, the assistant editor, who is included in the process as the first internal reviewer, makes a formal evaluation by revealing the conformity of the study with the journal writing rules and the Ithenticate similarity rate. At this stage, there is no blind review process and the editor mediates all interactions between the first internal reviewer and the author. The identities of the assistant editor involved as the first internal reviewer and the author are not kept confidential.

In the next stage of the internal review, the field editor is included as the second internal reviewer according to his/her area of expertise. At this stage, the second internal reviewer examines the submitted study in terms of subject matter, contribution to the literature, explanation of the methodology and presentation of the findings. The blind review process is between the field editor and the author and identities are kept confidential. As in the previous stage, the editor mediates all communication between the field editor and the author, who is included in the process as the second internal reviewer. With the detailed review of the field editor, it is determined whether the manuscript is qualified to go to the referee and the decision is made to proceed to the evaluation stage.

In the final stage of the internal review, the editor, who is the decision maker, decides whether the manuscript is qualified to proceed to the peer review process for external review. In this decision, the evaluations of the first and second internal reviewers are taken into account. If the decision is positive, the manuscript proceeds to the external peer review process, which involves a double blind review process. The identities of external reviewers and authors are kept confidential and the peer review process is coordinated by the editor. At this stage, two national and/or international external reviewers who are experts in their fields are included in the process. The number of external reviewers can be increased by the editor depending on the progress of the peer review process. In the event that one of the reports does not find the study sufficient for publication or contradicts the other referee's report, the third referee's opinion is consulted. The final decision is made by the editor.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS (EXTERNAL REVIEW)

The peer review (external review) process involves external reviewers who provide impartial evaluations. These reviewers are selected according to their areas of expertise from among people who are not affiliated with the editorial board of the journal or who are not directly involved in the editorial processes.

After preliminary editorial control and field editor reviews, articles are sent to at least two national and/or international external reviewers (blind review) at the external review stage. If deemed necessary, the editor may increase the number of reviewers. Reviewers are selected according to their areas of expertise. Although the primary criterion in reviewer assignments is the field of expertise, institutional diversity is taken into account. Care is taken to ensure that the author and reviewer are from different universities.

External reviewers are asked to evaluate the originality of the articles, methodology, contribution to the scientific literature, presentation of findings and support and evaluation of results, policy recommendations, as well as whether previous studies related to the article are appropriately cited.

Authors should take into account the criticisms and suggestions provided by the external reviewers and, if any reviewer suggests revisions, submit a revised version of their manuscript for further consideration by the external reviewers. At this point, external reviewers may request more than one major or minor revision.

External reviewers may conclude that an article should be accepted for publication as is, accepted after revisions (major or minor), or rejected. On the other hand, for an article to be published, it must be accepted by at least two reviewers, or a majority of the appointed reviewers must accept the work. In cases where one reviewer accepts the article for publication and the other rejects it, the article is sent to a third reviewer for additional evaluation. The editor is then obliged to involve a third reviewer in the process. As a result, in order for the peer review process of an article to be completed, the majority of the reviewers must decide to accept or reject the work.

Articles that pass the peer review (external review) process with the approval of two reviewers or that are accepted by the majority of the reviewers are sent to the Editorial Board of the journal for final publication decision. Positive reviewer reports are not binding for the Editorial Board, but are primarily taken into account in decision-making. The editorial decision is final.

The manuscripts for which corrections are requested in the external reviewer reports are re-submitted to the same reviewers after being revised by the authors. If the manuscript is still deemed unsatisfactory by the reviewer at this stage, it may be rejected by the editor.

After the external review process is completed, the editor makes the final decision based on the reviewers' reports. The editor has the right to make the final decision on whether to publish the study, reject it, or send it to other reviewers for further reports.

External reviewers should not have any conflict of interest with the authors or financial supporters of the research. They should be involved in an impartial evaluation process. Reviewers should ensure that all information about submitted manuscripts is kept confidential and should notify the editor if they notice any copyright infringement or plagiarism by the author regarding the content of the manuscript. If the reviewer is not an expert in his/her field, does not consider himself/herself competent in the subject matter of the article, or is unable to provide timely feedback due to workload, etc., he/she should inform the editor and request to be removed from the peer review process. In such cases, the editor is obliged to include another external reviewer who is an expert in the field.

During the external review process, the editor clearly states that the manuscripts sent to the reviewers for review belong to the authors. Reviewers and editorial board members should not discuss the manuscripts with anyone else. The blind review process should be carefully monitored to protect the confidentiality of the reviewers. In some cases, the editor may choose to share the reviewers' comments on an article with other reviewers who have provided feedback on the same article. This may be done to provide additional insights to the reviewers involved in the process.

Manuscripts deemed suitable for publication by the editor are forwarded to the relevant Editorial Board for final review, revision and publication. During the editorial board review, an English language expert is consulted to review the abstracts of the articles. Articles written in English are reviewed by the language editor at this stage. The articles whose evaluation process is completed are ranked according to the date of acceptance for publication and published in the relevant issue of the journal. For articles accepted for publication, an acceptance e-mail is sent to the author(s) via DergiPark.