Article Evaluation Process

  1. After an article is added to the journal system, a plagiarism report is obtained for studies that pass the editor’s review. For studies that have no issues in the plagiarism report, the peer review process will be initiated.
  2. For studies to be added to the journal system, the following information must be provided: the author’s name, title, affiliated institution, department, city of the institution, and the author’s ORCID ID. Before being sent to reviewers, the names of the authors are removed by the editors, and the studies are forwarded to the reviewers anonymously.
  3. Studies uploaded to the journal system are first reviewed by the editors for compliance with writing and publishing guidelines. If there are any necessary corrections to be made by the author based on this review, the study is returned to the author with correction requests from the editors.
  4. Articles that do not comply with the journal’s writing guidelines will not be sent to reviewers.
  5. Studies that lack scientific content or do not contribute innovation to science are not accepted in our journal. Such studies are not included in the journal. Articles deemed suitable for evaluation based on writing and publishing guidelines are sent to at least two reviewers for review.
  6. The names of reviewers and authors are mutually kept confidential through a DOUBLE-BLIND PEER REVIEW process.
  7. Reviewers have a maximum of 30 days to evaluate the articles sent to them. If no report is submitted within this period, a new reviewer is assigned to the article.
  8. Articles that receive a POSITIVE REVIEW REPORT from the reviewers qualify for publication.
  9. Reviewers evaluate studies based on the following criteria:

   Additionally, authors can review the feedback from reviewers on their studies via the journal system. 

   - Consistency between the title and content 

   - Scientific validity and originality 

   - Appropriateness of language and expression 

   - Scope and approach to the subject 

   - Coherence and flow of the content 

   - Access to original and primary sources 

   - Access to new scientific studies and resources 

   - Contribution to the field 

   - Command of the field’s terminology 

   - Clarity, style, and readability 

   - Achievement of results 

  1. Reviewers may request to review the corrected version of an article before publication. If this request is noted in the report, the revised version is automatically sent to the reviewer through the system.
  2. Authors may appeal a reviewer’s report with reasonable arguments and supporting data. Appeals are reviewed by the journal management, and if deemed appropriate, opinions from another reviewer (or reviewers) may be sought.
  3. Authors can track the progress of their article in the evaluation process via the journal system using their account information. The peer review process must be closely followed, as the system allows only one round of revisions. Therefore, all reviewer evaluations must be completed, and reports must be uploaded to the system before any potential revisions can be made.
  4. Journal editors closely monitor the corrections requested by reviewers. Based on this, editors may decide whether an article will be published or not.
  5. A copyright transfer agreement is used during the submission process in the journal system. However, if deemed necessary by the editors or the editorial board, the copyright transfer agreement may also be requested separately from the author(s).
  6. Studies published in our journal can be used with proper citation of the journal name. Legal action may be taken against users who use the articles without proper citation. All responsibility in this regard lies with the user.

Average Initial Review and Feedback Time for Articles: 5 Days 

Average Evaluation Time for Articles: 10 Days