College of Education, NCCU-Review Guidelines

Review Guidelines

Home / Journal of Education & Psychology / Review Guidelines

::: :::

Date 2023-09-13

Review Process of the Journal of Education & Psychology

The review process includes a preliminary review, a first-round review and a second-round review.

1. Preliminary review

(1）The editorial board of the Journal conducts preliminary reviews of submissions. All submissions meeting requirements (including number of characters, format, style, etc.) and expected level of rigorousness of the Journal are submitted for further review.

(2) Submissions deemed by the editorial board as not meeting requirements (including number of characters, format, style, etc.) and expected level of rigorousness of the Journal are rejected and returned.

2. First-round review
(1） Submissions passing the preliminary reviews are submitted for double-blind reviews by two experts in the relevant fields.

(2) First-round review opinions are divided into four categories: a. Accept, b. Revise and accept without further review by the original reviewers,c. Revise and review by the original reviewers, d. Reject.

(3) The review opinions of two anonymous experts in the relevant fields determine how submissions should be further processed after the first-round review (see chart below for further details)

Review Process Chart

Opinion 1 Opinion 2	Accept	Revise and accept without further review by the original reviewers	Revise and review by the original reviewers	Reject
Accept	Accept	Accept	Author Revision	Sent to the third reviewer
Revise and accept without further review by the original reviewers	Accept	Accept	Author Revision	Sent to the third reviewer
Revise and review by the original reviewers	Author Revision	Author Revision	Author Revision	Reject
Reject	Sent to the third reviewer	Sent to the third reviewer	Reject	Reject

3. Second－round review
(1) All submissions recommended for “revise and review by the original reviewers” by the first-round reviewers are returned to submitters by the editorial board. Submitters must revise according to review opinions and mail the revised papers, along with “description of revisions” and “responses” back to the editorial board within two weeks. The editorial board then sends the revised papers to the original reviewers and determine whether to accept or reject the papers based on reviewers’ opinions on the revised papers and the number of papers under review.

(2) The second-round review process and chart are the same as those in the first-round review, except review opinions only include (1) “accept,” (2) “revise and accept without further review by the original reviewers, and (3) “reject”.

Paper revision and publication
1. Authors of all papers accepted by the editorial board must revise papers according to review opinions, and return the revised papers, along with description of revisions and responses within the required timeframe, otherwise publication may be delayed.

2. Revised papers are reviewed by the editor of the Journal. If revisions and responses do not meet the requirements of the review opinions, the editorial board can reach resolutions to delay or cancel publication.

3. Revised papers that pass the editor review and second-round review by the editorial board are issued “Certificate of Acceptance.” Authors of accepted papers must return revised papers (hard copy and word format copy saved on CD) within one week of receiving “Certificate of Acceptance,” along with copyright license agreement, to avoid delay in publication.

Review guidelines
1. Guidelines for reviewer expertise
(1) The editorial board recommends domestic and/or overseas experts to review papers based on topics of papers.

(2) The editorial board actively monitors quality of reviews and establishes reviewer information database, which is used to aid reviewer selection, to ensure review quality and enhance level of academic dialogue.

2. Guidelines for avoiding conflict of interest
(1) Any member of the editorial board or the executive editor who submits a paper to the Journal cannot participate in discussion about the paper submitted, or process, keep any information related with the submitted papers (including review opinions, reviewer information), such responsibilities are to be performed by the editor-in-chief instead.

(2) In recommending reviewers, the editorial board considers not only the most appropriate candidates to review submissions to the best of its ability, but also possible conflict of interest between submitters and potential reviewers (considerations may include factors such as advisor-advisee relationship or coworker relationship) and avoid potential conflict of interest.

3. Guidelines for protecting privacy and confidentiality of personal information
(1) During or after reviews, the editorial board and administrative staff involved in editing are responsible for protecting privacy and confidentiality of submitters’ and reviewers’ personal information. Reviews are conducted on anonymous basis in principle.

(2) The Journal abides by the “Rules for Safeguarding Journal Editorial Information of the Journal of Education & Psychology,” to fulfill its responsibility to protect privacy and confidentiality of personal information.

Withdrawals
1. Requests for withdrawals of submissions must be submitted in writing and by registered mail.

2. To avoid wasting resources, submitters who withdraw submissions during the preliminary review phase cannot make any further submissions within one year after withdrawals.

3. After completion of the preliminary review, the editorial board sends requests to submitters to revise papers (including reviews after revisions and paid publications). Submitters must return revised papers within two weeks after the revision requests are sent, otherwise submissions are considered withdrawn.

4. Submitters who need to make significant revisions to papers may make requests, via registered mail, to the editorial board, to extend revision period to four weeks. Revised papers not returned after four weeks are considered withdrawn. Submitters with special circumstances or reasons may make requests in writing to the editorial board for longer revision period.