Regulations on Reviewing Manuscripts

Revised on August 30, 2024

1. Principles of Review

The Editorial Board will appoint two or more reviewers to evaluate submitted articles and decide whether to publish them following the review process. In making these decisions, the Editorial Board will be aware of each author’s identity and whether the author received funding for the submitted article.

2. Submission Deadlines

The deadlines for manuscript submissions are as follows: January 31 (Issue 1), April 30 (Issue 2), July 31 (Issue 3), and October 31 (Issue 4). Reviews will be conducted for articles submitted by these deadlines. Articles submitted after these dates will be considered for the following issue. The Editor-in-Chief may adjust the submission deadlines if necessary.

3. Selection of Reviewers

① Assignment of Reviewers

The Editorial Board will assign at least two reviewers for each submitted article. No member of the Board who has submitted an article may participate in the review process for that issue.

② Qualifications of Reviewers

- Reviewers must be full-time university professors or holders of a doctoral degree with specialized knowledge in the relevant field of the articles they review. If necessary, non-members of the Society may be asked to review articles.

- Reviewers must not be affiliated with the same institution as the author(s) of the article under review.

- A contributor may not be a reviewer for articles in the same issue in which their articles might appear. However, for submitted articles with four or more co-authors, contributors other than the lead author may review articles submitted for that issue, and reviewers from the same institution may also evaluate those submissions.

4. Criteria for Review

① The Editorial Board will determine whether the topic of the submitted article is suitable for this journal. If it is not suitable, the Board may reject the paper or request that it be withdrawn.

② Reviewers will evaluate submitted articles based on several criteria, including formatting, understanding and reflection of existing research, consistency and accuracy, originality, contributions to the field, and the accuracy of the abstract, among other factors.

5. Results and Final Decisions

① Submitted articles will be classified into the following three categories: 'Accepted', ‘Not Accepted,’ and 'Rejected'. For articles in the first two categories, reviewers must identify the passages that require correction; in the case of rejected articles, reviewers must clearly explain the reason for rejection.

② Manuscripts will not be published if two or more reviewers judge that the manuscript is not suitable for publication or if two reviewers recommend that it be revised for resubmission while a third deems it unsuitable for publication.

③ The Editor-in-Chief will inform all contributors of the review results and publication status of their submissions as assessed by each reviewer. Additionally, the editor will request any necessary revisions and corrections. At this stage, the identity of the reviewers will not be revealed to the contributors.

④ Authors who are invited to revise and resubmit their submissions should reflect the review results and submit a revised article, together with responses to each revision request, within two weeks from the date of notification. Those who need more than two weeks to revise their articles should seek permission from the Editorial Board.

⑤ Reviewers will determine whether to publish or reject the revised article and will notify the Editorial Board within seven days.

⑥ The Editorial Board will make a final decision regarding the publication of the article, taking into account the judgments of all reviewers. The Board may request the author to revise the manuscript in light of the opinions expressed by the reviewers.

⑦ If a contributor fails to submit a revised manuscript by the assigned deadline after receiving a request for revision, or if they do not raise any objections within 7 days of notification of review results, the Editorial Board may choose not to publish the article.

⑧ The Editor-in-Chief has the authority to adjust the number of articles scheduled for publication if there is an excess of submissions available.

6. Notification of Requests for Reconsideration

① Contributing authors who find flaws in the review of their submissions may request reconsideration. If such a request is made, the Editorial Board will send an e-mail to the relevant author(s) immediately upon receipt of the request and convene a meeting within 7 days to decide whether the request for reconsideration is reasonable. The Board also reserves the right to cancel such meetings.

② If the Board decides that the request for reconsideration is reasonable, it will seek an additional review from someone not involved in the initial review. The selection of this third reviewer, the review process, the synthesis of the results, and notification of the final decision will be carried out within four weeks.

③ If the Board decides that the request for reconsideration is unreasonable, the contributing author will be promptly informed of this decision.

7. Issuance of e-Certificate for Manuscripts Scheduled to be Published

Upon the request of a contributing author, a “Certificate of Scheduled Publication” may be issued for an article deemed “fit for publication” in the final review. Additionally, a “Certificate of Intended Publication” may be issued upon request.