Skip to main content



When a work is sent to the journal, firstly, it is examined whether it is in compliance with the publishing principles and writing form of the Journal. In this context, first of all, it is examined whether the citation rules and the text structure are consistent with the writing form. At the same time, a plagiarism report is taken to determine the plagiarism rate of the work. If the plagiarism rate of the work is more than 25%, the work is rejected by the editorial board without any further action. If the work does not comply with the spelling rules and citation method, this situation is reported to the author and it is sought to send the form in accordance with the spelling rules and citation method within 1 month. If the necessary changes are not made and the work is not sent during this period, the editorial board has the power to reject the work. If the work complies with the citation procedure, the spelling rules and the plagiarism report is less than the specified rate, the referee is appointed for the work to be examined. Except as required by the author to make changes, the preliminary review phase and referee appointment are completed within 7 (seven) work days.





The referee evaluation process is carried out through DergiPark. In the journal, the publication process is carried out on the basis of double-blind review. The referees are determined by taking into consideration the area the work is related to. After the referee is determined for a work, an invitation is sent to the referee to review the work. The referee can accept or decline the invitation within seven days. If the referee does not take any action within the seven-day period, an additional five- day period is given. If no action is taken during this period, another person is appointed as the referee. If the referee accepts the invitation, a review period of 20 + 7 (twenty days + seven days extension) is given.


In the event that the referee requests changes from the author, the author is expected to complete the necessary changes within one month from the date of the submission of the referee report to him/ her and send the updated version of the work to the editorial board. If the work is not sent to the Journal within the specified time in accordance with the requested referee changes, the editorial board has the power to reject the work.


If one of the referees' evaluations is positive and the other is negative, a third referee is determined on the same basis. If the report of the third referee is positive, it is decided to publish the work and to refuse it if it is negative.


It is foreseen that the referee process will be completed approximately in three months when the referee evaluation is completed with two referees, and in four months when the referee is completed with three referees.





Works that the referees have positive opinions are edited by the editorial board for publication. At this stage, it is rereviewed whether the work is in accordance with the writing form and citation procedure. Simple corrections that are unsubstantial are made by the editor board by showing the changes in Word with the track changes mode and the author's approval is obtained after informing the author that the work will be published in accordance with the changes in this matter. In cases where it is required that the changes should be made by the author, the author is requested to complete the changes.


In the editing process, all works that will be published in accordance with the magazine's complete issue format are combined in a single file. Once the complete issue file has been completed, a copy of the journal is sent to the publisher for publication. Finally, print and online issues are published in accordance with the publication dates.


For an example of the referee evaluation report (evaluation criteria) see. ASBÜHFD Referee Evaluation Criteria.


We use cookies to ensure you get the most of our services

By using, you are consenting to the use of cookies.