Focus and Scope

The main aim of the journal is: 1. to broaden knowledge in the field of broadly understood Korea-related studies, 2. to develop co-operation between scholars and scientists researching into Korean humanities and social sciences, 3. to present comparative and interdisciplinary studies in this respect as well as 4. to educate and disseminate reliable information about Korea. The articles are peer-reviewed by two reviewers (double-blind review). The editors reserve the right to appoint a third reviewer in case of doubts. The reviews are stored in the journal’s editorial office. The editorial board reserves the right to publish selected articles without two reviews.

Peer Review Process

Peer review is an essential element of scholarly publication which serves two key functions:
(i) It ensures proper verification of articles before publishing (assessing their validity, significance and originality to ensure only good research is published), and
(ii) It improves the quality of the research by helping eliminate and correct inadvertent errors or to increase the quality of submitted papers.

The reviewers should accept an invitation to peer review a paper only if they are competent to review the article (the topic of the article is within their field of expertise). The reviewers should be aware of the fact that on average it takes about 5 hours to review a paper properly.

If a reviewer cannot conduct the review within the stipulated time limit, he or she shall let the editor know about the fact immediately, and if possible advise the editor of alternative reviewers or the alternative deadline.

In order to avoid any potential conflicts of interest the journal has implemented double-blind peer review process.
Reviewers shall not disclose information acquired in the review process.
Any recommendations made by a reviewer will contribute to the final decision made by the editor.
A reviewer would be expected to evaluate the article according to the criteria specified in the review form available online in English after the assignment acceptance.

It is recommended to provide a quick summary of the article in your report to reassure the author and editor that you have understood the article. The review should be courteous, constructive and should provide insight into any deficiencies. In the event of an article being rejected due to poor quality, or out of scope, the reviewer should justify his opinion making sure that both editors and authors are able to fully understand the reasoning behind the comments. If the reviewer suggests revision, it should be indicated whether minor or major changes are required. Additionally, a reviewer should indicate to the editor whether or not he/she would be happy to review the revised article or whether it is up to the editor to check that the author has followed the reviewer’s instructions.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Publising Ethics

Plagiarism and ghostwriting policies
Plagiarised papers will not be accepted. In the event of detecting violations of copyright, including plagiarism and ghostwriting after the publication of a paper, the author is solely liable for any breach. The journal reserves the right to publish information on detected breach with apologies to the author(s) whose rights have been violated including reference to the paper in which such breach occurred.

Reviewers

Jerzy Bańczerowski, professor, Poznań College of Modern Languages
Gang So-jeon, doctor, Jeju University
Kim Gi-hyeong, professor, Korea University
Kim Hye-jeong, research professor, Korea University
Ko Seong-hwan, professor, Korea National Open University
Lee Hyeong-dae, professor, Korea University
Lee Yeong-gyeong, professor, Catholic Kwandong University
Oh Kyong-geun, professor, Adam Mickiewicz University
Park Jong-seong, professor, Korea National Open University
obszar nauk humanistycznych, obszar nauk społecznych