Article 1 (Purpose)
The regulation aims to determine the requirements concerning the evaluation of the research papers submitted to Youngsan Theological Institute (hereinafter the Institute).
Article 2 (Process from Submission to Publication)
The process of submission to publication is as follows:
- a. Call for papers is to be announced on the Institute's website.
- b. Contributors must submit manuscripts through the online system (JAMS, https://ysti.jams.or.kr) via the website (https://www.ysti.co.kr) of the Institute.
- c. All papers submitted to the online submission system shall include the following components: paper title (in Korean and English), the name of the contributor (in Korean and English), an abstract (in Korean and English), paper content, footnotes, a bibliography (including pages), and key words (in Korean and English).
- d. Each manuscripts is accepted upon the recommendations of three referees in consultation with the editorial board.
- e. Based on the referees' evaluation results, the editorial board shall determine to accept the paper for publication or not.
- f. The editorial board is obliged to notify the final decision about acceptance to the contributor, who is then to check the evaluation comments through the online submission system.
- g. The manuscripts accepted are to be published after a thorough editing process.
Article 3 (Qualifications of Referees)
Referees must be current participants in teaching and research activities with respect to the topic for more than 3 years after their earning of a doctorate with the concentration of the field from major universities in Korea and abroad. They are to be appointed by the editorial board.
Article 4 (Confidentiality)
Selected referees are obliged to be discretely confidential to external assessment and must not disclose to the contributor or other referees any information regarding the contributor, the content or the result of the paper, and etc.
Article 5 (Evaluation Criteria)
The papers submitted to the Institute are subject to the criteria below. The referee must submit an evaluation form within a specified deadline.
a. Evaluation of Paper Format
The institute examines whether the paper is written in compliance with the submission policy and includes required components―paper title (in Korean and English), the name of the contributor (in Korean and English), an abstract (in Korean and English), paper content, footnotes, a bibliography (including pages), key words (in Korean and English).
b. Evaluation of Paper Content
The referee reviews the paper with respect to the 15 areas given below and grades each area with appropriate points respectively.
1) Style: 20 points
- (a) Is the paper written in compliance with the submission policy of Youngsan Theological Institute? (5 points)
- (b) Are the organization and the writing style of the paper acceptable for academic readership? (5 points)
- (c) Are references used in the paper appropriate and relevant? (5 points)
- (d) Is the paper complied with the code of research ethics of Youngsan Theological Institute? (5 points)
2) Scholarly Achievements 30 points
- (a) Is the paper relevant to Youngsan theology, Pentecostal theology or theology of the Holy Spirit? (5 points)
- (b) Does this paper demonstrate uniqueness in regard to its theme, method, interpretation, application, and etc.? (10 points)
- (c) Does the paper present a relevant, valid thesis? (5 points)
- (d) Does the paper demonstrate professional and academic achievements in its research topic? (5 points)
- (e) Does the paper enhance interrelation with other areas of research? (5 points)
3) Paper Content 30 points
- (a) Does the paper cohere with its content based on the given research topic? (10 points)
- (b) Does the paper utilize necessary resources for the research topic? (10 points)
- (c) Does the paper clearly state its main argument? (10 points)
4) Practicality 20 points
- (a) Does the paper contribute to the holistic development of the Church in Korea and the world? (5 points)
- (b) Does the paper demonstrate contribution to the establishment and development of Youngsan theology? (10 points)
- (c) Does the paper quote from Youngsan Theological Journal more than 5 times? (5 points)
Article 6 (Final Decision)
- 1. Review score of 100-90 points is signified as "accepted"; review score of 89-80 as "accepted with revision"; review score of 79-70 as "reevaluation after substantial revision"; and review score of 69 and below as "declined for publication."
- 2. The criteria of final decision about acceptance of the paper are as follows:
- a. accepted: The paper in its research topic and style presents compliance to the nature of the journal and is to be published without further modification of the contributor or reconfirmation by the referees (yet the contributor is to be given an opportunity to revise the paper).
- b. accepted with revision: The contributor shall revise the paper based on the given comments of the referees, and the modified paper is then to be published without reconfirmation by the referees.
- c. reevaluation after substantial revision: Due to some issues in its content or organization of the research, the paper is obliged to make a substantial revision based on the comments provided by the referees. The revised paper must be reevaluated.
- d. declined for publication: Due to the necessity of extensive revision or the problems in the research organization, the paper is deemed impossible to be revised within a specified date. Or owing to its failure in the compliance to the nature of the journal, the paper is not possibly to be published.
- 3. The final results from the 3 referees are to be accumulated and determined as follows:
- a. The result of acceptance of the paper is to be finalized when two referees or more have reached the same evaluation. (However, the paper is determined to be “declined for publication,” when the two referees have evaluated it as “reevaluation after substantial revision” and the other as “declined for publication.”).
- b. If three different results originate from the three referees, the highest and the lowest results are to be excluded but the remaining result is to be determined as the final result.
- 4. Reevaluation must be made only one time and the final decision shall be subject to Article 6. (The paper is, however, to be published only when two referees or more evaluate it as “reevaluation after substantial revision.”)
- 5. The final determination regarding publication of the evaluated paper is to be made by the editorial board.
Article 7 (Notification of the Final Result)
Once determined, the final result of the paper evaluation shall be notified to the contributor within one week.
Article 8 (The Contributor's Compliance Obligations of the Revision and Making of an Appeal on the Final Result)
The contributor must faithfully adhere to the comments of the referees. If the contributor with legitimate reasons makes an appeal on the final result, the editorial board must deliberately discuss and determine the matter.