eISSN : 2093-7814
pISSN : 1225-9578
Insert title here
Editor's & Reviewer's Guide

Instruction For reviewers

The JKASNE has a double-blind peer-review system to improve the quality of manuscripts.

Reviewers have the professional responsibility to assist authors in improving their manuscript by giving expert advice to them in the peer-review process. Reviewers also contribute to editorial decisions.

When reviewers are asked to review a manuscript, they should keep the information about the manuscript confidential.

Reviewers should not use ideas expressed in the manuscript for their own research without the authors’ consent, and should not contact the authors personally without permission from the editor.

Reviewers should review the manuscript objectively and appropriately without any bias or personal interest. If reviewers have a conflict of interest when reviewing the manuscript, they should consult with the editor.

Reviewers are required to respond to the invitation to review the manuscript by the scheduled time and to finish reviewing the manuscript in a timely manner.

Reviewers should present their comments about the manuscript to the authors courteously.

When reviewers suspect misconduct or ethical issues in the manuscript, they should immediately inform the editor and cooperate with the editor regarding any next steps to be taken. The resolution process will be initiated following the flowchart provided by the COPE (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts).


Duties of reviewers

  • Contribution to Editorial Decision: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
  • Promptness: Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
  • Confidentiality: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
  • Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  • Acknowledgement of Source: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.


Instructions for editors

Editors should strive to improve the quality of the JKASNE.

Editors should provide guidelines about research and publication ethics to researchers and information about the submission process and the review system to authors and reviewers.

Editors should strive to maintain a fair and blind peer-review system by choosing suitable reviewers in their area of research expertise to review manuscripts. In order to ensure that the peer-review system is effective, editors should develop and update a database of reviewers.

The editor-in-chief should identify eligible editorial board members, and provide them with information about the JKASNE. The editor-in-chief should discuss the publication of the JKASNE with editorial board members regularly.

Editors should keep information about manuscripts, authors, and reviewers confidential. Editors should not use ideas expressed in the manuscript for the editor’s research without the authors’ consent.

Editors should evaluate manuscripts objectively and appropriately without any bias or personal interest.

Editors are required to be alert to misconduct or ethical issues in manuscripts, and to follow the standards of research and publication ethics.

When an editor finds a fundamental error in a published manuscript, he or she should immediately initiate the process of resolution, including an expression of concern, correction, and/or withdrawal of the manuscript, as required. The resolution process will be initiated following the flowchart provided by the COPE (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts).

  • 용어 변경

닫기    저장

·  ·  ·  ·