Review Process

Article Evaluation Method of Reviewers

The articles sent to the journal are evaluated scientifically by the Board of Reviewers using the double-blind method.

Preliminary Evaluation Process

Articles submitted to the journal for publication is checked by the editors in terms of purpose, scope, method and writing principles.

In case the editors of the journal find a problem that needs to be corrected in the publications, the publication is returned via the system to be reviewed by the author, presenting its justifications, and the author is informed.

Articles are checked for plagiarism with the iThenticate® (Plagiarism Detection Software) or Turnitin program. If it is higher than 20% excluding references, it is sent back to the author for correction.

The publications that pass the editorial review successfully are sent to 2 different reviewers from different universities for scientific evaluation and review.


Invitation to Arbitrate

The reviewers are given 5 days to accept the reviewer invitation sent through the system and 15 days for a full evaluation of the study.

If the reviewer declares that he cannot evaluate the article for various reasons, he should notify the journal editor at the stage of the reviewer invitation and reject the arbitrate through the system.

The reviewer begins to review and evaluate the publication; it starts after the full text of the publication and the article evaluation form are shared with the reviewer.

If the reviewer cannot evaluate the article within the specified time; an additional period of 7 days is given or the editor-in-chief of the journal is informed that he cannot evaluate the study by stating the reasons. In this case, the editor sends an invitation to another reviewer to appoint a new reviewer as soon as possible.


Reviewer Evaluation Method

Reviewers are expected to make only a study-based evaluation in line with publication principles.

The reviewers make their evaluations through the article evaluation form sent by the editor.

The reviewers are expected not only to answer yes or no to the evaluation criteria, but to detail their negative opinions and state their reasons.

In particular, the reviewers who gave a negative opinion should add and explain the weaknesses of the studies and the reasons for rejection to the author with their evaluations.

If the reviewers need to express their opinions on the article, the explanations are uploaded to the system as a separate Word file.


Reviewer Evaluation Process

If both reviewers give an opinion as "It is suitable to be published", the article is published in the journal as soon as possible.

If both reviewers give an opinion as "Not Suitable for Publication", the article will not be published in the journal. In this case, the author is informed.

If one of the reviewers requests a correction, the article is returned to the author and he is asked to make the necessary changes.

The modified article is sent back to the reviewers through the editor-in-chief and processed according to the decision of the reviewers.

If one of the reviewers gives a positive opinion and the other a negative opinion during the evaluation process, the article is sent to a third reviewer. The study is published in line with the final report of the third reviewer.


After the Evaluation Process

 All evaluation processes and reviewer reports are stored in a digital archive.