Evaluation of the reviewed articles with \"Blind Review\" for objective and independent review increases the quality of the publication and provides confidence. For this reason, the principle of double-blind refereeing is applied in the article evaluation process in our journal. In our journal, the author(s) and referees cannot contact directly in the articles in the review process. The evaluations and comments of the referees are carried out through the journal management system. The opinions of the referees on the evaluation forms and the article text are conveyed to the authors by the editor. The reviewers' objective, independent and ethical completion of the evaluation process should be monitored by the editor.<\/p>\n

The referees of our journal must have the following ethical responsibilities:<\/p>\n

Referees,<\/p>\n

\n
• The article should fulfill its ethical responsibilities in the evaluation process.<\/li>\n
• Agree to review work related to their field. They should not review articles outside their field.<\/li>\n
• The article must comply with the evaluation period.<\/li>\n
• The article should complete the evaluation process in an impartial and confidential manner.<\/li>\n
• It should carry out the evaluation process objectively, regardless of personal characteristics such as gender, religion, political, commercial conflicts, citizenship, etc.<\/li>\n
• When they think that they are faced with a conflict of interest in the article evaluation process, they should refuse to evaluate the article and inform the journal editor about it.<\/li>\n
• They should use polite\/constructive language and style when evaluating the article they are reviewing. They should avoid comments and statements that are offensive, insulting, slanderous and hostile.<\/li>\n
• In accordance with the principle of confidentiality, they can only use the content of the studies they examine after they are published. They cannot use any information from rejected studies.<\/li>\n
• Suggest citations that will scientifically contribute to the author(s)'work. However, referees should not make suggestions in order to increase their own number of citations.<\/li>\n
• Must not have access to information about the identity of the author(s). In the event that the author(s)'information is accessed or received, the evaluation process should be terminated.<\/li>\n
• He\/she should be aware of the personal biases that may occur during the refereeing process and take this into account when reviewing the article.<\/li>\n
• For the articles they will reject, they should write their reasons clearly and in detail in the referee report.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

   <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

  \u0130ncelenen makalelerin objektif ve ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z olarak incelenmesi i\u00e7in \u201cK\u00f6r Hakemlik\u201d ile de\u011ferlendirilmesi yay\u0131n kalitesini art\u0131r\u0131r ve…<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dildergisi.aydin.edu.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1233"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dildergisi.aydin.edu.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dildergisi.aydin.edu.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dildergisi.aydin.edu.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dildergisi.aydin.edu.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1233"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/dildergisi.aydin.edu.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1233\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1234,"href":"https:\/\/dildergisi.aydin.edu.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1233\/revisions\/1234"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dildergisi.aydin.edu.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1233"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}