Peer Review Methods

All research articles in Korea Policy have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymized peer review by at least one reviewer.

Korea Policy uses a double-blind model of peer review. Neither author nor reviewers know the identity of each other.

The review process begins with an initial judgment of suitability. Submissions are sent back to authors without review if the editors judge that the paper is inappropriate for the journal or is unlikely to survive the review process. Articles submitted for review may also be rejected by the editors upon initial submission if they do not satisfy the conditions outlined in the author guidelines, including ethical standards. Articles that are not rejected will be considered under a double-blind review process.

Once a paper is under review, Korea Policy will seek to find a reviewer who can provide high quality reviews and who is knowledgeable about the approach, substance, and methods of the article. Authors will have the opportunity to identify reviewers who present a problem. They will also be asked to identify co-authors, collaborators, students, and others who cannot be expected to provide an impartial assessment of the work. In general, strong support from the reviewer will be necessary for publication, but decisions about publication are at the discretion of the editor.