[ Review Policy ]
Ⅰ. Paper review request by the Editorial Board
The editor-in-chief shall convene the Editorial Board within one week before the application deadline for paper publication.
The Editorial Board shall assign three reviewers according to the topic of the paper and request the review.
Personal information related to the paper review shall never be published to anyone.
Ⅱ. Review Criteria
The reviewers shall review papers according to the following criteria.
Clarity of research purpose and problem
Rationality of research method
Appropriateness of research content
Contribution to the special education field
Faithfulness of abstract and references
Ⅲ. Review Period
The reviewer commissioned for the first review shall write a review result of the paper as Publishable, Publishable after Revision, Re-review after Revision, or Not Publishable, and return the review result to the Editorial Board.
If the overall review result of the first review is Publishable after Revision or Re-review after Revision, the reviewer shall write the reason in the review result form and return it to the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board shall then send the review result to the author and request a revision of the paper and a revision checklist.
If the overall review result of the first review is Not Publishable, the reviewer shall write the reason in detail in the review result form and return it to the Editorial Board. Then the Editorial Board shall then immediately notify the author of the review result.
Even if one of the reviewers judges Not Publishable in the first review, if two or more reviewers judges Publishable (after Revision), then the overall review result is Re-review after Revision. In this case, the Editorial Board shall inform the author about the revision of the paper and a revision checklist, and then request a second review from the reviewer who judged Re-review after Revision or Not Publishable.
The second review shall undergo the same review and confirmation process as the first review. The reviewers should review the revised manuscript and submit the review result again. At this time, the reviewers must select Publishable or Not Publishable regarding final publication.
Ⅴ. Objection Procedure
If the overall result of the first or second review is Not Publishable by one reviewer’s Not Publishable, it is possible to file an objection only once. The objection procedure is as follows.
1. The contributor submits an application for objection in writing (within three days after notification of overall review).
2. The Editorial Board makes a decision about whether or not to accept the objection after receiving the application for objection.
3. Handling objection
- Request additional review to the reviewer who judged Not Publishable.
- Replace the reviewer who judged Not Publishable with a new reviewer (additional review fee must be paid).
4. Notify the author about the final result for the disputed paper.
5. Other
- The disputed paper shall be published in the next issue in principle.
- Publication in the issue shall be determined by the Editorial Board in consideration of the publication date.
Ⅵ. Review Fee
The review fee shall be paid at the time of application for paper publication.
Ⅶ. Decision on Publication
1. Publishable
- All the review results of three reviewers are Publishable in the first review.
- The overall review result of the first review is Publishable after Revision, and it was decided as Publishable after the reviewers’ confirmation of the authors’ revisions.
- The overall review result of the second review is Publishable.
2. Not Publishable
- Not Publishable with two or more reviewers in the first review
- Not Publishable with one reviewer in the first review and Re-review after Revision with more than one reviewer
- Not Publishable with more than one reviewer in the second review
| Classification | 1st Reviewer | 2nd Reviewer | 3rd Reviewer | Overall Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Same judgment by three reviewers | Publishable(after Revision) | Publishable(after Revision) | Publishable(after Revision) | Publishable(after Revision) |
| Same judgment by three reviewers | Re-review after Revision | Re-review after Revision | Re-review after Revision | Re-review after Revision |
| Same judgment by three reviewers | Not Publishable | Not Publishable | Not Publishable | Not Publishable |
| Same judgment by two reviewers | Publishable(after Revision) | Publishable(after Revision) | Re-review after Revision | Re-review after Revision |
| Same judgment by two reviewers | Publishable(after Revision) | Publishable(after Revision) | Not Publishable | Re-review after Revision |
| Same judgment by two reviewers | Re-review after Revision | Re-review after Revision | Publishable(after Revision) | Re-review after Revision |
| Same judgment by two reviewers | Re-review after Revision | Re-review after Revision | Not Publishable | Re-review after Revision |
| Same judgment by two reviewers | Not Publishable | Not Publishable | Publishable(after Revision) | Not Publishable |
| Same judgment by two reviewers | Not Publishable | Not Publishable | Re-review after Revision | Not Publishable |
| Different judgments | Publishable(after Revision) | Re-review after Revision | Not Publishable | Re-review after Revision |
3. Miscellaneous
- Even if the paper is judged as “Publishable” after Re-revision, it may not be published in the relevant issue if it is considered that there is a problem in the publication of the journal. When this happens, the authors shall be immediately notified of the fact and that the paper will be published in the next issue.
- If the authors are requested to revise the paper as a result of the review, but if they do not submit the revised paper within 10 days without any special reason, the Editorial Board may decide judge the paper Not Publishable.
- Matters not specified in the above regulations regarding publication shall follow the decision of the Editorial Board.
Ⅷ. Notification of Publication or No Publication
The Editorial Board shall immediately notify the authors after deciding whether to publish a paper or not.
Ⅸ. Guarantee of Anonymity
The editor-in-chief shall not reveal the contributors’ real names during the review process to guarantee anonymity between the contributors and the reviewers of the paper.
If the contributor is an editor, the editor-in-chief shall prevent the editor from intervening in the paper reviews, and the contribution of the editor shall not be revealed until the completion of reviews.
The editor-in-chief shall prevent reviewers who belong to the same organization as the contributors from reviewing their the contributors’ paper.
Ⅹ. Miscellaneous
Matters not specified in this regulation shall follow the decision of the Editorial Board.