THE COSTUME CULTURE ASSOCIATION Code for Review Process The Research Journal of the Costume Culture
Code for Review Process (Korean)

Enacted in April 20, 1993
Most recently revised in August 11, 2021

1. This code regulates matters regarding the reviewing of papers submitted to the Research Journal of the Costume Culture (RJCC).
2. Each paper submitted to the RJCC is evaluated by a minimum of two reviewers.
3. The criteria for selecting reviewers are as follows: Regular members of CCA that are prominent scholars in the field related to costume culture are selected by the editing committee or the editor-in-chief. Reviewers are selected in consideration of the relation between their area of specialty and the submitted paper, as well as their research achievements and position. Special reviewers can be appointed for consultation on special fields. Reviewers will be paid for their duties.
4. The criteria for reviewing submitted papers are as follows: 1) creativity of thesis topic; 2) credibility and accuracy of data; 3) validity of research method; 4) thesis composition and coherence of description; 5) academic contribution; and 6) appropriateness of reference/English abstract, etc.
5. Manuscripts can be ‘accepted’, ‘accepted after revision’, ’to be reviewed after revision’, or ‘rejected’ by reviewers. The results are reported to the editorial-in-chief. 1) For manuscripts ‘accepted’ or evaluated as ‘accepted after revision’ by reviewers, editorial committee members can request more revision to authors. When the revised results are approved by the editorial committee member, it can be proceeded to publishing.
2) Manuscripts that are ‘to be reviewed after revision’ should be revised according to the reviewers’ comments and orders. The revised paper should be submitted with the ‘Revision report’ and re-evaluated by reviewers.
3) If two and more reviewers evaluated as ‘rejected’ in the same stage of review, the final decision is ‘rejected’. If it is evaluated as ‘rejected’ by only one reviewer, a third reviewer can be selected for additional review. In the case the third reviewer evaluated the paper as ‘rejected’, then it is finally rejected. Rejected papers can not be re-submitted under the same title and content.
4) Although paper is ‘accepted’ by reviewers can be later ‘rejected’ by the editorial committee regardless of the results of the review, when it is considered as violation of research ethics.
5) If the multiple manuscripts with similar research subjects and ranges are repeatedly submitted, the 2nd or the 3rd similar manuscript can be refused to process for peer-reviewing, reflecting opinions of the editing committee.
6) If there is a reviewer raising an issue of the possibility for duplicated publication or plagiarism of the manuscript under review, it can be evaluated as ‘rejected’, reflecting opinions of the editing committee.
7) If authors fail to submit the revised paper within six months after receiving the judgment as ‘to be reviewed after revision’ without special reasons, the editorial committee can make a decision on finalization of the review process of the paper. 6. Reviewers must provide specific reasons to support their evaluation of manuscripts. The results of the review must be returned to the CCA within 14 days. Reviewers who fail to return the results within the given review period, can be replaced.
7. The entire review process, from paper submission to publication, must be carried out anonymously. Reviewers should not disclose or misuse any information gained during the review process.
8. Significant disagreements regarding the results of the review are resolved by the editorial committee.
9. The editorial board makes a decision on the manuscripts to be published in accordance with the order of submission. The order of papers published in each issue is decided, considering the number of papers in Korean/English, special fields, and papers under the expedited review process.

※ Issues unspecified in this code are subject to decisions by the editorial committee.