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).

▪ Double Blind Peer Review

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

▪ Criteria and Procedures of Reviewer Selection

1. Qualification: The reviewers are selected according to the following criteria.

1) Reviewer of the JKASNE.

• - Should be qualified to review manuscripts through guidance or reviewing a thesis related to this society
• - Should possess a doctoral degree, is a university professor or person who is considered to have equal qualifications, and is familiar with the latest knowledge of each research field.

2) Reviewers are selected upon consideration of the research field and conceptual and regional distribution.

2. Organization: Review members include an English proofreader.

3. Procedure: In the event the editor-in-chief recommends a member who meet the criteria of reviewers among nursing professors worldwide, the editorial board shall review the recommended members and the president of the academy shall appoint said member as a reviewer upon receiving approval from the board of directors of the KASNE.

4. Service Term: Review members have a term of two years and may be reappointed.

5. Special Reviewer: If external reviewers are required for special review of a manuscript, the editorial board may appoint special reviewers and entrust them with review of said manuscript.

6. The review of manuscripts follows separate regulations upon review.

▪ Regulations on Review

1. The purpose of these Regulations is to define matters regarding the review of manuscripts submitted to the JKASNE.

2. No paper that has violated the ethics regulations of this academic society shall be published.

3. Master's thesis or doctoral dissertation must be clearly stated as such, and be reviewed by the reviewers of the Korean Academic Society of Nursing Education. The degree holder must be the 1st author of the material submitted for publication.

4. Manuscripts that do not meet the manuscript qualification and the submission requirements shall be rejected.

5. At least two review members are assigned for each submitted manuscript (excluding English proofreaders), and the reviewers’ names of each manuscript shall be disclosed.

6. The editorial board shall recommend appropriate compilation members and the president of the academy shall appoint them as reviewers.

7. Manuscript reviews are performed based on the reviewer's evaluation with the manuscript review evaluation form that follows the quantitative research, qualitative research, review paper, Q-methodology, and conceptual analysis.

8. Review results are judged as 'accepted (no correction necessary)', ‘accepted after revisions (minor revision)', 'review after revisions (major revision)', or 'rejected (no publication)', and the manuscripts are evaluated as whether to publish or not according to the review results.

• 1) Accepted: Manuscript may be published without change or revision.
• 2) Accepted after revisions (minor revision): The authors shall revise in accordance with the comments by the reviewers, and the reviewers or the editorial board shall confirm the revisions.
• 3) Review after revision (major revision): The authors shall revise in accordance with reviewer comments, and the reviewers shall review the revised manuscript and decide whether to adopt or not.
• 4) Rejected (no publication): Only when the contents of the manuscript fall into any one of the following cases:
  • (1) The manuscript lacks nursing significance in the theme of research
  • (2) The contents plagiarized previous studies.
  • (3) The manuscript lacks reliability or validity of research results
  • (4) In the evaluation form (results), over 30% of the items are graded as 'very poor.’
  • (5) The manuscript is considered as impossible to revise.
  • (6) Manuscripts that are judged as ‘rejected (no publication) cannot be resubmitted.

9. After reviewing a manuscript by editing board members, the editor-in-chief of the JKASNE makes a final decision on manuscript publication.

10. The review contents and results shall not be disclosed to anyone other than the author.

11. Regardless of manuscript review results, if the editorial board deems that the manuscript does not fit the guidelines for submission to the JKASNE, publication of the manuscript may neither be adopted nor rejected.

12. Reviewers shall undertake manuscript review within 2 weeks of receiving a manuscript and send the review results through the online submission system.

13. If the authors fail to submit the revised manuscript within the due date, the process of review is regarded as withdrawn.

14. After the final manuscript is submitted, the final manuscript shall go through editorial calibration and review process of the editorial board until the publication process. Corresponding authors are obliged to faithfully reflect the opinions of the editorial board, even those that have passed the final review, and are obliged to carefully check proofs and the correction of the printed version before publication. Authors are responsible for any error identified after publication.

15. Should any author object to or appeal against the results of the review, the author can send a letter to the editorial board to either express dissatisfaction or appeal. The editorial board reports the final decision to the corresponding author after the editorial board’s discussion and decision. For more information, contact the administration manager of the editorial board (nurse-edu@hanmail.net).

▪ Peer Review Process

1. A manuscript is first reviewed for its format and adherence to the aims and scope of the journal. If the manuscript meets these two criteria, it is dispatched to three investigators in the field with relevant knowledge. The manuscript compilation committee initially confirms that the authors are qualified for manuscript submission to the Journal, and notification of the manuscript reception is sent to the authors via email. Manuscripts which do not meet the submission requirements will not be processed for peer review.

Before reviewing, all submitted manuscripts are inspected by Similarity Check powered by iThenticate (https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/), a plagiarism-screening tool.

2. Peer review for submitted manuscript is conducted by at least two reviewers who fit with the general concept and detailed field of the manuscript. The authors’ names and affiliations are removed during peer review (double-blind peer review).

3. After reviewing a manuscript by review members, editing board member reviews the manuscript. At that time, the editorial board member finds that requested corrections were not fully made, the board member request re-correction. Assuming the manuscript is sent to reviewers, the JKASNE waits to receive opinions from all reviewers. After then, the editor-in-chief of the JKASNE makes a final decision on manuscript publication based on the reviewers’ critiques and recommendations, as well as the scientific merits of the manuscript.

4. The acceptance criteria for all papers are based on the quality and originality of the research and its scientific significance. Acceptance of the manuscript is decided based on the critiques and recommended decision of the reviewers. An initial decision is normally made within 2 weeks of receipt of a manuscript, and the reviewers’ comments are sent to the corresponding author by e-mail. The corresponding authors should provide a complementary revision, and the revised manuscript along with the complementary revision record should be submitted by online paper acceptance system within 2 weeks. Corrected contents according to the indications of review board members are listed by category and indicated the corrected portion. If a further revision period is required, the author should contact the editorial office.

*Modified report from based on review results
  Paper title:
  Reception number: Ex)2020-0051

Contents of paper review	Response and corrected contents

Paper revision that is required for the printing of the manuscript is done by authors. A final decision on acceptance/ rejection for publication is forwarded to the corresponding author from the editor.

5. Peer review process for handling submissions from editors, employees, or members of the editorial board
All manuscripts from editors, employees, or members of the editorial board are processed same to other unsolicited manuscripts. During the review process, submitters do not engage in the selection of reviewers and decision process. Editors do not handle their own manuscripts although they are commissioned ones.