In the evaluation process of articles submitted to our journal, the following steps are taken based on COPE principles:

Author and Institutional Diversity: In line with the principle of author and institutional diversity, a single author’s articles cannot be published consecutively in two issues of our journal.

Initial Editorial Review: Articles submitted through Dergipark undergo an initial editorial review process by section editors. During this process, the article's alignment with the journal's publication goals, quality standards, and writing guidelines is assessed. Articles deemed unsuitable are not forwarded for further review and are returned. Articles with minor correctable deficiencies may be returned to authors for resubmission. Authors are given a 5-day period to address these deficiencies and resubmit. Articles not resubmitted within the 5-day period will be returned.

Plagiarism Check: After uploading their manuscripts, authors will receive an automatic similarity report from the integrated plagiarism detection tool, intihal.net. Articles with a similarity rate exceeding 10% are returned to the author, and the review process is terminated. The similarity to a single source must be less than 4%. Even if the overall similarity is below 10%, articles with problematic similarities are removed from the review process. Throughout the publication process, regular similarity reports are obtained via iThenticate, and necessary checks are performed.

Ethics Approval: Articles lacking ethics committee approval are returned at the beginning of the process. Authors must upload the ethics committee approval form during article submission.

Preliminary Review Timeframe: The preliminary review process is completed within 15 days. Articles successfully passing this stage are then entered into the peer review process.

Double-Blind Peer Review: Our journal employs a double-blind peer review process. Efforts are made to ensure that reviewers are not from the same institution as the authors. The identities of both reviewers and authors are strictly confidential and are not disclosed. The Review Board changes with each issue and is composed based on the topics of the submissions. Reviewers for interdisciplinary articles are selected according to their relevant fields.

Reviewer Assignment: Initially, two reviewers are assigned based on the article’s field. The editor reviews the reports and makes a decision. If necessary, additional reviewer opinions may be sought. If one reviewer recommends rejection and another recommends major/minor revisions or acceptance, the editor may make a decision without a third review. The editor communicates the rationale for the decision to the author(s).

Revision Compliance: Authors are required to diligently and promptly comply with requested revisions and submit the final corrected version of their article within the requested timeframe. If authors do not adequately address the revision requests, they will be informed, and additional revisions may be requested. Articles not resubmitted within the specified timeframe will be removed from the review process and returned.

Revision Marking: For works requiring revisions during the review process, all corrections must be highlighted using the "track changes" option in Office programs or marked in red. Articles not submitted in this manner may be excluded from the review process.

Acceptance Decision: A decision to accept an article does not guarantee publication. Articles completing the review process are subject to editorial review, and additional revisions may be requested if necessary. The final decision on publication rests with the editor.

Final Proofreading: Accepted articles undergo a final proofreading process. Authors are asked to make any requested corrections and respond as quickly as possible. Authors are informed about the process at each stage by responsible editorial assistants.

Final Publication Decision: The final decision on publication rests with the Editor. The Editor's evaluation of the article, along with reviewer reports, is communicated to the author(s) as soon as possible.

Publication Process: After a manuscript is accepted for publication, the editor assigns the assistant editor to oversee the final review process. During this stage, the manuscript undergoes final checks for grammar, spelling, and language consistency, with contributions from the copyediting and language editors. The assistant editor ensures that the manuscript is fully prepared for the design phase and ready for publication.

Non-Reviewable Texts: Texts such as book reviews, conference reviews, opinion pieces, and translations, which do not fall under research articles, theoretical papers, or review texts, may be published based solely on editorial review and decision without undergoing the peer review process.