Review Policy for Journal of Multi-Cultural Contents Studies

Issue date: January 5^th, 2009
Revised date: November 1^st, 2013
Revised date: January 26^th, 2015

Chapter 1. Manuscript submission

1. Article 1. (Manuscripts for review) All articles published in the journal are reviewed according to the following policy.
2. Article 2. (Submission deadline) Manuscripts can be submitted any time during the year. The submission deadlines for each issue are as follows: Manuscripts for the April 30th publication issue must be submitted by February 23^rd, for the August 31st issue by June 31st, and for the December 31^st issue by October 31^st.
3. Article 3. (Restrictions) A manuscript which main content is part of a previously published work will not be accepted, and a manuscript rejected by the journal must not be re-submitted under the same title.

Chapter 2. Selection of reviewers and review procedure

1. Article 4. Immediately after the submission deadline, the Editor-in-Chief convenes an Editorial Board meeting, appoints three peer-reviewers who are scholars with expertise in the relevant field, and makes and carries out the decision for the acceptance of manuscripts based on the review results.
2. Article 5. Peer-reviewers must assess the assigned manuscripts on unbiased terms and on the following point-based criteria: manuscripts accepted without further modification (80 points or above), manuscripts provisionally accepted with modifications (70-79 points), manuscripts subject to re-assessment after modifications (60-69 points), rejected manuscripts (60 points or below). Each reviewer assigns points for the manuscript and returns the report to the Editorial Board.
3. Article 6. Manuscripts accepted without further modification proceed directly to the production process.
4. Article 7. A manuscript provisionally accepted with modifications will be sent to the author with the peer reviewers’ reports containing modification suggestions reviewed by the Editorial Board. The revised manuscript with satisfactory revisions will be accepted and proceed to the production process. If needed, the Editorial Board may request a re-assessment for a revised manuscript.
5. Article 8. When a manuscript requires re-assessment after modifications, the revised manuscript will be re-assessed by the reviewers whose decisions are conformed to by the Editorial Board.
6. Article 9. When a manuscript is rejected, the reasons for rejection will be closely reviewed by the Editorial Board who finalizes the decision and reports the result to the author.
7. Article 10. All matters relevant to the peer review process are kept confidential under the discretion of the Editorial Board.

Chapter 3. Decisions

1. Article 11. Decisions are made according to the average review points which are calculated by adding the review points of the three peer-reviewers and then dividing the number by three. The final decision will be one of the following four options:
   1. 1. 80 points and above: Acceptance without further modifications
   2. 2. 70-79 points: Provisional acceptance with modifications
   3. 3. 60-69 points: Re-assessment after modifications
   4. 4. 60 points and below: Rejection
   5. 5. If the assessment of one reviewer substantially differs from the assessments of the other two reviewers, the final decision will be made by the Editorial Board.

Supplements

1. 1. The above Review Policy applies from January 5^th, 2009.
2. 2. The above Review Policy is revised and applies from November 1^st, 2013.
3. 3. The above Review Policy is revised and applies from September 5^th, 2014.
4. 4. The above Review Policy is revised and applies from January 26^th, 2015.