
서브상단 글자

Reviewer Regulations

컨텐츠 내용입니다.

Chapter 1 Judging Criteria


Article 1 (Judging Criteria)

The criteria for the submitted articles are as follows.

1. Appropriateness of the theme: Conformity and appropriateness of the content and the title of the article.
2. Appropriateness of the article system: Appropriateness of the table of contents and the system of the article.
3. Understanding of previous studies: Accurate understanding of the previous studies.
4. Originality of the article: Evaluation of new research results.
5. Appropriateness of data selection: Appropriateness of the selection of research data and citation data.
6. Appropriateness of research method: Appropriateness and scientific approach of the research method.
7. Validity of argumentation method: Objectivity and logicality of the argumentation method.
8. Academic contribution: Value and utilization of research achievements.
9. Accuracy of expression: Selection of terms, accuracy of sentences.
10. Accuracy of foreign language abstract: accuracy of foreign language abstract, accuracy of terminology translation, etc.


Article 2 (Evaluation)

1. The article is evaluated as a total of 100 points.
2. Whether or not to publish the article is determined by the following criteria:

1) Publication: Over 80 points
2) Publication with revision: 70 points or more
3) Re-reviewing after revision: 60 points or more
4) Not for publication: less than 60 points


Article 3 (Acception of articles)

The editorial committee accepts articles at least two months before the publication date.


Article 4 (Selection of reviewers)

The editor-in-chief convenes the editorial committee and appoints three reviewers per paper.


Article 5 (Request for reviewing)

The editor-in-chief should fill out the request form for reviewing and send the form, the article and the prescribed form for reviewing to the relevant reviewers.


Article 6 (Reviewing)

Each reviewer evaluates the article. The perfect score is 100 points.


Article 7 (Submission of reviewing report)

Each reviewer shall fill in the the prescribed form for reviewing and notify the editorial chairman of the results of the reviewing.


Article 8 (Decision on whether to be published)

The editor-in-chief shall convene the editorial committee to announce the results of the reviewing and decide which articles to be published.


Article 9 (Notification of Results and Correction of English Abstract)

The editor-in-chief shall notify the authors of the results to the editorial board by attaching the forms for reviewing. The editor-in-chief shall refer the English abstracts of the articles to be published to an English editing company and send the results to the authors. The cost of the corrections will be borne by the author. If the author wishes to make an individual revision, the author must submit to the editorial committee a proof that he or she has received proof-reading from a professional service.


Article 10 (Cancellation of publication)

Articles published in other journals or articles whose plagiarism have been revealed shall be canceled in accordance with the decision of the editorial committee.
http://www.ink.re.kr/html/sub3_04_e.html?lang=eng
www.ink.re.kr
CC-MAIN-2024-30
20656
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:SOB6MGSVSK3SNAGER4NY7SIVFF7FZN7R
<urn:uuid:ebea7c16-e1ec-4751-9bb7-a12c209c35fe>
2024-07-13T13:40:58Z
112.175.184.39
text/html
sha1:4ACJRNXHZNBR6GBJDXIHUJRGDI4CAJNY
<urn:uuid:cad76c37-e1e5-49a7-8486-c05352ee1d08>
http://www.ink.re.kr/html/sub3_04_e.html?lang=eng
response
<urn:uuid:6c234725-af07-4c4a-96aa-276580264871>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2024-30
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for July 2024
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-246
software: Apache Nutch 1.20 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.5-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/