Reviewer Guideline

Articles sent to ''Anatolia Cor'' are evaluated by at least two reviewer who are experts in their field, in accordance with the double-blind refereeing principles.

Reviewer make suggestions to the editorial board on the quality of the articles, and whether they need minor-major revisions or should be accepted or denied.

If reviewer detect any conflict of interests, ethical violations or plagiarism regarding the articles, they should report to the editorial board.

Once the reviewer accept the invitations, they have the responsibility to finish evaluations on time. Authors are also obliged to response to the notifications (Revision etc.) made by the journal on time.

Reviewer should evaluate and protect all the data sent to them, within the principles of privacy.

Reviewer Evaluation Process

All submissions to Anatolia Cor will undergo a rigorous screening and evaluation process to determine the journal's scope and academic quality and its alignment with innovations in the field. The journal utilises a double-blind peer review system that ensures anonymity between authors and reviewers. The process proceeds as follows:

• Initial assessment: Upon submission, a newly received manuscript will be reviewed by the Editor or Deputy Editor to ensure compliance with the basic submission criteria and by the Editor-in-Chief to assess its suitability for the scope of Anatolia Cor. Manuscripts that do not meet these initial criteria will be rejected without further review.
• Peer review: Upon successful completion of the initial screening, the manuscript will be assigned to a processing editor who will then distribute it to at least two experts in the relevant field for a double-blind peer review process.
• Initial decision: A decision on a peer-reviewed article will only be made after at least two review reports have been received. At this point the manuscript may be rejected, corrections (major or minor) requested, or accepted. If accepted, the manuscript is sent to the layout editor for formatting. The final decision to accept the manuscript will be made by the Editor-in-Chief following a recommendation from the processing editor.
• Revision phase: An article requiring revision will be returned to the submitting author, who will have up to three weeks to format and revise the article. The revised text will then be subject to review by the processing editor. The processing editor will assess the adequacy and appropriateness of the changes, as well as the responsiveness of the author(s) to the reviewers' comments and suggestions. If the revisions are deemed insufficient, the cycle will be repeated and the manuscript will be returned to the submitting author for further revision.