1. Members of the editorial board initially evaluate the submitted research to determine whether it meets the formal criteria, falls within the journal's interests, and is eligible for review.

2. The journal follows a double-blind review policy, maintaining the confidentiality of the researcher's identity and the review committee at all evaluation stages, even among the editorial and advisory boards. Members of the editorial board nominate two experts in the specific field of the research for evaluation. If the opinions of the two reviewers differ, the research is sent to a third reviewer whose decision is binding.

3. Regardless of the journal's specific review and evaluation process, it is committed to sending its final decision (publish, publish with minor revisions, or decline) to the researcher within two months of receiving the research. If the reviewer's request is for substantial modifications, the researcher has a non-extendable deadline of thirty days to make the necessary changes. After this period, the research is automatically considered unsuitable for publication.

4. While the researcher commits to academic integrity, the journal, in turn, ensures privacy and confidentiality during the evaluation and review stages. The journal's team, including editors, reviewers, consultants, designers, and technical support, commit to not disclosing any information provided in the research. The entire journal team, especially the reviewers and the editorial board, also commit not to use any exclusive information from the research under evaluation that they have come across in their capacity at the journal.