Korean | English

pISSN : 1975-7700 / eISSN : 2734-0570

Home > Author > Review Process

Review Process

Article 1 (Purpose) 

The purpose of this regulation is to define matters related to whether or not to publish the article contributed for publication in the Journal of KKITS.

Article 2 (Request for article review)

① Article review shall be made in confidential manner. Confidential review is a  method in which the contributor's information is kept secret to the examiner and the examiner's information is kept secret to the contributor.

② The editor-in-chief selects three examiners or more and requests them to review the article.

③ The results of the article requested to review are notified to the contributor according to the review results.

Article 3 (Article review standards) 

The examiner strictly reviews the contributed article according to the following subparagraphs and evaluates each item in 3 grades (sufficient, normal, insufficient).

① The suitability of the article title

② Summary of the article abstract

③ Rationality of article composition and expression

④ Creativity of research contents and method

⑤ Feasibility of the research result

⑥ Appropriateness of references

Article 4 (Article review report)

① The examiner who has been requested to review the article from the editor-in-chief will finish both primary and secondary reviews within 3 weeks from the date of request for general contribution, and within 10 days for emergency contribution and send the article review opinion to the editor-in-chief.

② If the examiner does not send the review result within this period, the editor-in-chief may stop the review request and change the examiner. 

③ When the examiner who is requested to review an article cannot reviewed the article due to inevitable circumstances such as overseas business trips or inconsistency in major, the reason shall be immediately notified to the edit-in-chief, and the editor-in-chief can change the examiner.

④ The format of the article review opinion is determined by the editing committee.

⑤ The comprehensive evaluation of the article review report is classified as follows.

   1. Publish (Accept): When the  article contributed is excellent and can be published as it is.

   2. Publish after modification (Minor Revision): Publish after modification (Minor Revision): This refers to a case where some contents of the article need to be modified or supplemented.

   3. Review after modification (Major Revision): When it is necessary to modify or supplement the composition and expression of the article, the creativity of the research content, and the feasibility of the results.

   4. Reject: Refers to a case that is not suitable for publication due to a serious problem with the content, research method, or research ethics of the article. In this case, a specific reason must be presented.

Article 5 (Tertiary review) In the case of review after modification in the secondary review, the modification of the tertiary review shall be decided by the editing committee.

Article 6 (Notice of article review result)

① The editor-in-chief notifies the contributor of the result after the review is completed, but may request modification or supplementation of the article according to the article review opinion. When the editing committee finally decides whether to publish or not, the result shall be notified to the contributor.

② The author of the article decided to be published by the editor-in-chief shall submit the final modified article and answer.

Article 7 (Appeal) 

If the article contributor has an objection to the article review result, the content can be appealed in writing. In this case, the editing committee deliberates the content of the appeal and sends the result in writing to the article contributor. 

Article 8. Matters not specified in this regulation are subject to the determination of the editing committee.