Peer Review Processes
Papers submitted to this journal can be published only if they have passed through the three-step screening process.
Determining whether the paper submitted online matches the direction of our journal
|A review is made as to whether the submitted manuscript matches the direction of this journal. This adequacy review is basically determined through a meeting of at least three members of the research center, editor-in-chief, and editors.|
The stage of reviewing the academic value of the manuscript by reviewing the content of the manuscript
The editor-in-chief selects the chairman of the general review committee for the submitted manuscripts.
The relevant reviewers are recommended through the editorial board meeting, and the review request is made via e-mail and landline to experts in the recommended field.
The three reviewers who are allowed to examine the manuscript are experts in the field of the subject, and academic ties are excluded.
The reviewers are basically composed of experts registered with the National Research Foundation.
First, search for keywords related to the manuscript to be reviewed through “Integrated Information on Korean Research Achievements” on the website of the National Research Foundation through “Keyword Search” to find specialist researchers in the field.
After that, the relevant researchers are selected as reviewers based on the research field and paper performance of each specialized researcher through “researcher search”.
When sending the manuscript to be examined to the selected reviewers via e-mail, the manuscript is sent without all personal information such as name and school so that the contributor is unknown.
After that, based on the results sent after the three reviewers proved that their own evaluation results were published, the publication price after revision (minor revision), the next issue re-examination after revision (large revision), and publication impossible.
The general review chairman reports to the editor-in-chief, and the editor-in-chief convenes the editorial board to decide whether to publish. The result is notified to the contributor in accordance with the paper review rules.
In this process, an anonymous review opinion letter is enclosed to the contributor to notify the results of the review according to the regulations.
The stage of reviewing the revision status and editing status of manuscripts that have passed the content review
The third step is to check whether the relevant contributor has corrected it according to the points of the reviewers in the case of papers that have been decided as publication prices after revision.
At this stage, if the manuscript contributor raises an objection to the point of view of the reviewer, this journal leads the debate between the contributor and the reviewer, and seeks to improve the quality of the manuscript through such debate.
In the third step, the editorial board reviews the editing status of the thesis and reviewers whether it meets the regulations of this journal, the overall editing status such as figures and diagrams, and the English abstract. Finally, it will be published after completing the checking by native speakers in a professional company.
Since 2013, e-mail addresses of researchers registered with the Research Foundation cannot be secured, so e-mails and phone numbers are secured through the homepages of the universities and research institutes to which the researcher belongs, and selected as reviewers.
However, since this process takes a long time, the personal information of the existing reviewers has been made into a database. Through this, we wanted to minimize the time consuming.
However, although it is time consuming for the editorial committee of this journal to select the reviewers through the homepage of the National Research Foundation, this method is the best to select experts in the relevant area as reviewers based on the research field and the academic performance.
Also, according to the experience of the editorial committee of this journal, it is understood that the review opinion was more specific and strict when asked to review the manuscript by new and emerging researchers.
Therefore, the editorial committee of this journal will continue to make efforts to select competent professional researchers as reviewers through the National Research Foundation's “Integrated Information on Korean Research Achievements” despite time consuming.
As mentioned above, the editorial committee of this journal seeks to further expand interdisciplinary convergence under the recognition that the subject of global citizenship (or citizenship) is a field that requires interdisciplinary convergence as well as any other subject.
Previously, it was based on the humanities and social sciences, but in the future, we are promoting to expand to the fields of arts and natural sciences in relation to cultivating global citizenship (or citizenship).
For this, we think that what is needed more than anything else is to ensure expertise in selecting reviewers. Therefore, we are expanding the selection of reviewers through the existing method, “Integrated Information on Korean Research Achievements,” in order to select reviewers with more professional knowledge.
In other words, We are trying to select the reviewers through the National Research Foundation's
In addition, the editorial board of this journal strives to improve the quality of the paper published in order to make itself into a higher-quality journal and seeks to advance to SCI/SCOPUS-class journal.
In this respect, we are pushing ahead selection of reviewers using databases such as SSCI and SCOPUS http://www.scopus.com/source/browse.url.http://thomsonreuters.com/social-sciences-citation-index/, http://sunweb.isinet.com/cgi-bin/jrnlst/jloptions.cgi?PC= D. Also, editors were selected for each continent in cooperation with world-class institutions and scholars researching global citizenship.