Korean | English

pISSN : 1225-083X

2020 KCI Impact Factor : 0.37
Home > Author > Review Process

Review Process


Review of thesis for publication in academic journals

 


1) Purpose of examination

   The purpose of examination is to improve the quality of academic journals and promote academic development of the Korean Chinese literature community by preventing publication of lower-level papers with strict screening of papers for publication in academic journals.


2) Examination period

   Judging is closed on the first Friday of the month of each issue.


3) Qualification of the judges

   A. Chinese Literature majors with an assistant professor or higher or Ph.D.

   B. Those who have published books or thesis in the same field as the submitted manuscript or whose detailed major matches the submitted manuscript


4) Selection and appointment of judges

   A. Selection: Judges are selected by the editorial committee based on the “qualification of the judges” in 3) above.

   B. Number of judges per edition: In principle, the number of judges per edition of the submitted thesis is three.

   C. Appointment of judges:

   For the selected reviewers, the editorial director must send out a predetermined review request and a copy of the thesis without delay.

 

5) Papers that do not meet the submission rules will be rejected after prior review by the editorial committee.

 

6) Measures to ensure fairness in examination

   The editorial director must take a number of measures to ensure a fair examination, such as deleting the name and affiliation of the author and the part marked with ‘dolgo’ in the footnotes and references which enable to know or infer the author of the manuscript before sending the manuscript for review.


7) Evaluation items and points

   A. The screening items are 4 items: 'validity of research method', 'originality of research content', 'clarity of logic development', and 'academic contribution'.

   B. The number of points per item is 5 points.

   C. For more efficient and objective audit, audit items can be changed or added if necessary.

   D. The revision of the review item is decided by the editorial committee.


8) Processing of examination results

   A. In principle, if two or more of the three judges have a score of 13 or more, they will be posted.

   B. In spite of the item 'A', if one judge's rating is 9-12 points, it can be judged 'published after revision'.

   C. In spite of the item 'A', if one judge's rating is 8 points or less, it can be judged as'no publication.

   D. In the case of 'B' and 'C', the final decision is made whether or not to publish after discussion by the editorial committee.

   E. The editorial director must notify the contributor of the review results.

   F. In principle, the results of the audit are notified in writing.

   G. In spite of obtaining the qualification for publication in the Gazette as a result of the screening, if the judges attach a clue that the revision can be published, and the editorial committee determines that there is sufficient reason, the reason can be specified and the contributor can be instructed to revise.

   H. Articles that do not comply with the instructions for revision may be rejected

   I. If the contributor disagrees with the instruction to revise, he or she can write down the reason and request another review.


9) Exemption from examination

  Manuscripts for lectures by renowned domestic and foreign scholars invited by the conference and papers by foreign invited scholars presented at conferences can be exempted from review.