Reviewer Guideline

REFEREE EVALUATION PROCESS

Articles submitted to the journal go through a double-blind peer-review process. To ensure an impartial evaluation process, each application is reviewed by at least two independent referees who are experts in their field. The editorial board invites an external and independent editor to manage the evaluation processes of manuscripts submitted by editors or members of the journal's editorial board.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF REFEREES

1. Contribution to editorial decisions: Assists editors in editorial decisions and assists authors in improving their articles through editorial communication. It should be pointed out that other articles, works, sources, citations, rules and similar deficiencies related to the article should be completed.
2. Speed: Any referee who does not feel qualified to review the manuscript proposal or who knows that the manuscript review will not occur in a timely manner should immediately notify the editors and reject the invitation to review, thus ensuring that new referees are appointed.
3. Confidentiality: All article suggestions submitted for review are confidential and should be treated as such. It should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor. This also applies to referees who decline an invitation to review.
4. Impartiality standards: Comments on the article proposal should be made impartially and suggestions should be made in a way that the authors can use to improve the article. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate.
5. Acceptance of references: Reviewers should identify relevant published works not cited by the authors. The referee should also notify the editor of any significant similarity of the reviewed article and any other article (published or unpublished).
6. Conflicts of interest: Conflicts of interest should be reported to the editor. There should be no conflict of interest between the referees and the stakeholders of the article that is the subject of evaluation.