Editorial Policy

Chapter 1. General Provisions

Article 1. Publication

The journal is published bi-annually; June 30 and December 31.

Chapter 2. Editorial Board

Article 2. Composition and Terms of Service

The Editorial Board is composed of an editor, a managing editor, and generally includes an average of less than twenty-five board members and an editorial staff. The renewable term of service is two years.

Article 3. Responsibility

The Board is responsible for the whole process of reviewing and makes decisions necessary for publishing. The editor convenes editorial meetings for journal publication. In addition to conventional meetings, online meetings and teleconferences are available.

Chapter 3. Refereeing

Article 4. Selection of Referees

The Editorial Board selects two experts in the field of the submitted manuscript as referees.

Article 5. Criteria for Refereeing

Referees are asked to evaluate the manuscript according to the following criteria.

1. (1) Suitability as an academic journal article
2. (2) Appropriateness of the research method
3. (3) Creativity of the research subject
4. (4) Completeness of the content
5. (5) Degree of completion of paper writing
6. (6) Appropriateness of the paper abstract
7. (7) Accuracy of reference citation

Article 6. Referee’s decision

Referees make their reports by using the following form.

Criteria for examination	Examination result
1. Suitability as an academic journal article (20)	Excellent(20), good(16), moderate(12), somewhat poor(8), very poor(4)
2. Appropriateness of the research method (20)	Excellent(20), good(16), moderate(12), somewhat poor(8), very poor(4)
3. Creativity of the research subject (10)	Excellent(20), good(16), moderate(12), somewhat poor(8), very poor(4)
4. Completeness of the content (10)	Excellent(20), good(16), moderate(12), somewhat poor(8), very poor(4)
5. Degree of completion of paper writing(10)	Excellent(20), good(16), moderate(12), somewhat poor(8), very poor(4)
6. Appropriateness of the paper abstract(10)	Excellent(20), good(16), moderate(12), somewhat poor(8), very poor(4)
7. Accuracy of reference citation (10)	Excellent(20), good(16), moderate(12), somewhat poor(8), very poor(4)

Article 7. Referee’s decision

The editor makes the final decision with respect to the following criteria.

Review 1	Review 2	Final Decision
Accept	Accept	Publish without editor’s request
Accept	Accept after revision	Publish with editor’s recommendation and author’s revision
Accept	Reject	(total score over 120) After being determined appropriate by the editorial board, Publish with editor’s recommendation and author’s revision
Accept	Reject	(total score under 120)Reject
Accept after revision	Accept after revision	Publish with editor’s recommendation and author’s revision
Accept after revision	Reject	Not publish
Reject	Reject	Not publish

Chapter 4. Manuscript Submission

Article 8. Submission

1. 1. The manuscript should be submitted to: https://knuinmun.jams.or.kr/co/main/jmMain.kci.
2. 2. A sample article is available on the website, https://knuinmun.jams.or.kr. This is a Hankeul or Micro Word file which is designed to ensure that your article is prepared in the right way for publication.
3. 3. The Korean contributor must pay the publication fee when it is confirmed to be published. The publication fee are as follows.
4. *Publication fee:
5. General(비전임100,000KRW 전임200,000KRW)
6. Beneficiary (400,000KRW)

Article 9. Formatting Requirements

1. 1. The manuscript should be written in order of title, author's name, an abstract, key words, the body, and references.
2. 2. The manuscript should not exceed 12,000 words in length including footnotes and references in case of a paper and 1,500 words in case of review essay. All manuscripts must include an abstract of 150 or fewer words and five to ten key words.
3. 3. The author's name must be provided on a separate cover sheet, along with institutional affiliation, mailing address, and email address.
4. 4. The manuscript should be written in Microsoft word or Hankeul format.
5. 5. For a collaborative research manuscript, the name of the lead author should be followed by co-researchers.
6. 6. The manuscript should follow the format specified in the lead editorial regulations.

Article 10. Specifications for Table, Figure, Footnote, and Reference

1. 1. Tables and Figures
   1. (1) Tables and Figures should be completely understandable, independent of the text. Each table and figure must be mentioned in the text, given a title (placed in the center above the table or the figure), and consecutively numbered with Arabic numerals.
   2. (2) Title of Table and Figure: [Table *], [Figure *], center-justified. The first letter of each title is capitalized while the preposition is not.
2. 2. Footnote:
   1. (1) One author: D. Hume (1741), p. 83. R. Carnap (1950), pp. 127-128.
   2. (2) More than one author: A. F. Whitehead and B. Russell (1910), p. 35. A. F. Whitehead and B. Russell (1910), pp. 35-36.
   3. (3) Within a parenthesis, arrange two or more works by different authors in chronological order. (D. Hume 1741, A. F. Whitehead and B. Russell 1910, R. Carnap 1950)
   4. (4) Arrange two or more works by the same author by year of publication. Separate the citations with semicolons. (R. Carnap, 1922, 1928a, 1928b, 1950)
3. 3. Reference:
   1. (1) All sources cited in the text must be included alphabetically in the reference list. Below are examples of entries for, respectively, a journal article, a book, a magazine or newspaper article, a doctoral dissertation or master's thesis, and a citation from Internet resources. It follows the order of book and paper reference, Internet resources, and newspapers.
   2. (1) Journal articles
      • Árdal, P. 1977. “Convention and Value,” in G.P. Morice ed., David Hume: Bicentenary Papers. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, pp. 51–68.
      • Amir, L. 2018. “An Answer to the Reviewers of Amir’s Rethinking Philosophers’ Responsibility (2017)”. Journal of Humanities Therapy 9(1), pp. 97-124.
      • Anderson, R. L. 1994, “Nietzsche’s Will to Power as a Doctrine of the Unity of Science”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 25(5), pp. 729–750.
   3. (2) Books
      • Carnap, R. 1950. Logical Foundations of Probability. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
      • Griffin, N. and Linsky, B. eds. 2013. The Palgrave Centenary Companion to Principia Mathematica. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
      • Whitehead, A. N. and Russell, B. 1910. Principia Mathematica, vol 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   4. (3) Internet resources:

      https://knuinmun.jams.or.kr/co/main/jmMain.kci.

Article 11. Copyright

Manuscripts should be submitted to Journal of Humanities Therapy with the understanding that upon acceptance for publication copyright will be transferred to the Humanities Institute, Kangwon national University.

Chapter 5. Supplementary Provision

Article 12

1. 1. This policy shall take effect from December 2010.
2. 2. This policy shall take effect from December 2011.
3. 3. This policy shall take effect from December 2012.
4. 4. This policy shall take effect from December 2013.
5. 5. This policy shall take effect from December 2014.
6. 6. This policy shall take effect from December 2015.
7. 7. This policy shall take effect from December 2016.
8. 8. This policy shall take effect from December 2017.
9. 9. This policy shall take effect from July 2018.

Research Ethics Policy

Chapter 1. General Provisions

Article 1. Purpose

The Journal of Humanities Therapy, published by the Humanities Institute of Kangwon National University, complies with the “Guidelines for Securing Research Ethics” (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology Directive No. 218). The purpose of this policy is to establish research ethics, prevent research misconduct in advance, and prescribe matters concerning the establishment and operation of the Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Committee”) for the fair and systematic verification of research integrity in cases where research misconduct occurs. Matters not specified in this policy shall be governed by the above-mentioned “Guidelines for Securing Research Ethics.”

Article 2. Definitions

1. Research Misconduct (hereinafter referred to as “Misconduct”) refers to fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, improper authorship, and other acts that deviate from research integrity, committed in the proposal, conduct, reporting, or publication of research.

1. 1) Fabrication refers to the act of making up data or research results that do not exist.

2. 2) Falsification refers to the manipulation of research materials, equipment, or processes, or the arbitrary modification or omission of data, thereby distorting research content or results.

3. 3) Plagiarism refers to the appropriation of another person’s ideas, research content, or results without proper acknowledgment or citation.

4. 4) Improper Authorship refers to granting authorship to individuals who have not made a substantial academic contribution, or failing to grant authorship to those who have made such contributions without justifiable reason.

5. 5) Acts that intentionally interfere with an investigation into alleged misconduct, either directly or through others, or that harm the informant.

6. 6) Acts of proposing, coercing, or threatening others to engage in any of the acts specified in subparagraphs 1 through 4.

7. 7) Any other acts that seriously deviate from the generally accepted norms of the academic community.

2. Informant refers to a person who reports suspected misconduct or provides related evidence to the Chair of the Committee.

3. Respondent refers to a person who has been designated as the subject of investigation for alleged misconduct based on a report or by the Committee, including those suspected of involvement during the course of the investigation. Witnesses or reference persons are not included.

4. Preliminary Investigation refers to the procedure for determining whether there is sufficient basis to formally investigate allegations of misconduct.

5. Formal Investigation refers to the procedure for verifying the facts of the alleged misconduct.

6. Decision refers to the procedure of finalizing the results of the investigation and notifying both the informant and the respondent in writing.

Chapter 2. Establishment and Operation of the Research Ethics Committee

Article 3. Ethical Guidelines for Authors

1. Plagiarism

Authors shall not present any part of another person’s research or arguments as if they were their own. While reference to others’ work is permitted, proper citation must be clearly indicated. Presenting another person’s research, in whole or in part, as one’s own constitutes plagiarism.

2. Publication Credit

1. 1) Authors shall take responsibility only for research in which they have actually participated or to which they have substantially contributed, and shall be recognized for such contributions accordingly.

1. 2) The authorship and the order of authors (or translators) of a publication shall accurately reflect the degree of contribution to the research, regardless of academic rank or position. Authorship or first authorship shall not be justified solely by one’s position. Conversely, failure to include individuals who have contributed to the research or writing (including translation) as co-authors (or co-translators) is also unjustifiable. Minor contributions should be appropriately acknowledged in footnotes, prefaces, or acknowledgments.

1. 3) The list of authors must be finalized at the time of manuscript submission and may not be altered during the review process.

3. Duplicate Publication or Redundant Publication

1. 1) Authors shall not submit or publish previously published work (including work under review or accepted elsewhere), whether domestic or international, as if it were a new work. Even when using one’s own prior research, presenting it as new without proper citation constitutes self-plagiarism and is considered duplicate or redundant publication. If previously published work is used, the source must be cited whenever referenced. Authors must inform the editor of the journal about any prior publication and confirm whether it constitutes duplicate or redundant publication.

2. 2) Exceptionally, submission of the same work in another language or in a different country may be permitted, provided that the author informs the Editorial Board in advance. In such cases, the previously published journal and country must be clearly indicated in a footnote on the first page of the manuscript. Failure to disclose prior publication in advance, or failure to properly indicate such information in a footnote on the first page, shall be regarded as self-plagiarism and may result in sanctions in accordance with Chapter 5 (“Measures Following Verification”) of the Research Ethics Policy of the Journal of Humanities Therapy.

4. Citation and Referencing

1. 1) When citing publicly available academic materials, authors must ensure accuracy and clearly indicate the source unless the information is common knowledge. Materials obtained through manuscript evaluation or personal communication may only be cited with the consent of the provider.

1. 2) When quoting or referring to another person’s work or ideas, authors must clearly indicate this through footnotes or endnotes, enabling readers to distinguish between prior research and the author’s original contributions, interpretations, or arguments.

1. 3) Even when citing one’s own previous research, proper reference must be provided.

5. Obligation of Plagiarism Screening

1. 1) Authors must submit a statement confirming compliance with research ethics and a copyright transfer agreement upon manuscript submission.

1. 2) Authors must submit the results of a plagiarism detection system (e.g., CopyKiller). If the similarity index exceeds 15%, the Editorial Board shall determine the eligibility for review and publication through additional deliberation.

6. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence

1. 1) It constitutes research misconduct to present outputs generated by generative artificial intelligence as the author’s own original research results, or to submit or publish such outputs without proper disclosure of their use.

1. 2) If generative AI is used to produce text, images, code, or other materials included in the research, the author must clearly indicate the use and scope of such tools. In principle, such disclosure should be provided in footnotes on the relevant pages. If individual disclosure is impractical, a comprehensive statement may be included in a footnote on the first page of the manuscript.

Article 4. Ethical Guidelines for Editors

1. Editors bear full responsibility for decisions regarding the publication of submitted manuscripts and shall respect the dignity of authors and their academic independence.

2. Editors shall evaluate submitted manuscripts fairly and solely based on their academic merit and compliance with submission guidelines, without discrimination based on the author’s gender, age, institutional affiliation, or any personal bias or relationship.

3. Editors shall assign manuscripts to reviewers who possess relevant expertise and the ability to provide fair and objective evaluations. In doing so, editors shall avoid selecting reviewers who have close personal relationships with, or strong conflicts of interest regarding, the author, in order to ensure objectivity.

4. Editors shall not disclose any information about the author or the content of the manuscript to anyone other than the reviewers until a final publication decision has been made.

Article 5. Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

1. Reviewers shall evaluate manuscripts requested by the Editorial Board within the specified review period and shall promptly submit their evaluations. If a reviewer determines that they are not qualified to evaluate the manuscript, they must immediately inform the Editorial Board.

2. Reviewers shall assess manuscripts objectively and fairly, independent of their personal academic beliefs or relationships with the author. They shall not reject manuscripts without sufficient justification, nor solely because the manuscript conflicts with their own perspectives or interpretations. Reviewers must not evaluate manuscripts without thoroughly reading them.

3. Reviewers shall respect the author’s dignity and academic independence as a professional scholar. Review reports should clearly present the reviewer’s judgment and provide detailed explanations for any recommendations for revision. Reviewers should use respectful and appropriate language and refrain from derogatory or offensive expressions.

4. Reviewers shall maintain confidentiality regarding manuscripts under review. Except when seeking expert advice for evaluation purposes, reviewers shall not disclose the manuscript to others or discuss its content. Furthermore, reviewers shall not cite or use any part of the manuscript prior to its publication without the author’s consent.

Chapter 3. Establishment and Operation of the Research Ethics Committee

Article 6. Composition of the Research Ethics Committee

1. The Committee shall be established as a standing committee within the Editorial Board.

2. The Committee shall consist of seven members, including one Chairperson, comprising three ex officio members and four appointed members.

3. The ex officio members shall be the Dean of the College of Humanities, the Director of the Humanities Institute, and the Editor-in-Chief. The appointed members shall be selected from among the Editorial Board members and appointed by the Director of the Humanities Institute.

4. The Director of the Humanities Institute shall serve as the Chairperson, represent the Committee, and convene and preside over its meetings.

5. The term of appointed members shall be two years, and they may be reappointed.

Article 7. Functions of the Research Ethics Committee

The Committee shall deliberate and decide on the following matters.

1. Establishment and operation of policies related to research ethics and research integrity.

2. Receipt of allegations of research misconduct and designation of the responsible body for handling such reports.

3. Initiation of preliminary and formal investigations, and approval of investigation results.

4. Protection of informants and measures for restoring the reputation of respondents.

5. Determination of actions based on the results of research integrity verification and implementation of follow-up measures.

6. Other matters referred to the Committee by the Chairperson.

Article 8. Procedures of the Research Ethics Committee

1. The Chairperson shall convene meetings of the Committee and preside over them.

2. Decisions shall be made with the attendance of a majority of the incumbent members and the approval of at least two-thirds of the members present.

3. When the Chairperson deems that a matter is minor, deliberation may be conducted in writing in lieu of a formal meeting.

4. When deemed necessary, the Committee may request relevant persons to attend meetings and provide statements or opinions.

Chapter 4. Verification of Research Integrity

Article 9. Reporting and Receipt of Allegations of Misconduct

1. An informant may report suspected misconduct to the Committee by any available means, including oral communication, written submission, telephone, or electronic mail. In principle, such reports shall be made under the informant’s real name. However, anonymous reports may be accepted if submitted in writing or by electronic mail and accompanied by the title of the research project or manuscript, along with specific details and evidence of the alleged misconduct.

2. An informant who knowingly reports false information, or who could reasonably have been aware that the report was false, shall not be entitled to protection.

Article 10. Period and Method of Preliminary Investigation

1. A preliminary investigation shall commence within 15 days from the date of receipt of the allegation and shall be completed within 30 days from the commencement date, subject to approval by the Committee.

1. 1) Whether the allegation falls under research misconduct as defined in Article 2(1);
2. 2) Whether the allegation is sufficiently specific and credible to warrant a formal investigation;
3. 3) Whether more than 5)years have elapsed since the alleged misconduct occurred.

2. The preliminary investigation shall review the following matters:

3. The preliminary investigation shall be conducted by the Committee. If necessary, the Committee may request assistance from relevant experts or establish a separate subcommittee for this purpose.

Article 11. Reporting of Preliminary Investigation Results

1. The results of the preliminary investigation shall, upon approval by the Committee, be reported in writing to the Director of the Institute and the informant within 10 days. However, this shall not apply in the case of anonymous reports.

2. The preliminary investigation report shall include the following:

1. 1) Specific details of the allegation and the identity of the informant;
2. 2) The alleged misconduct and the related research project;
3. 3) Whether a formal investigation will be conducted and the basis for such determination;
4. 4) Any relevant evidence.

Article 12. Initiation and Period of Formal Investigation

1. A formal investigation shall be initiated within thirty (30) days after approval of the preliminary investigation results, during which time the Committee shall establish an Investigation Committee to conduct the inquiry.

2. The formal investigation, including the final decision, shall be completed within 90 days from the date of commencement.

3. If the Investigation Committee determines that it cannot complete the investigation within the prescribed period, it shall provide justification and request an extension from the Committee.

Article 13. Composition of the Investigation Committee

1. The Investigation Committee shall consist of at least 5 members, appointed by the Chairperson of the Ethics Committee upon recommendation by the Committee.

2. The Investigation Committee shall include at least 3 members with substantial expertise and experience in the relevant field, and at least 2 external members to ensure fairness and objectivity.

3. Any individual who has a conflict of interest with respect to the matter under investigation shall not be appointed as a member of the Investigation Committee.

4. Prior to the commencement of the formal investigation, the list of Investigation Committee members shall be disclosed to the informant. If the informant raises a justified objection to any member, such objection shall be accepted.

Article 14. Request for Attendance and Submission of Materials

1. The Investigation Committee may request the attendance of the informant, the respondent, witnesses, and reference persons for the purpose of obtaining statements. In such cases, the respondent shall be required to comply.

2. The Investigation Committee may request the respondent to submit relevant materials. For the purpose of preserving evidence, the Committee may, with the approval of the Director of the Institute, take measures such as securing or retaining relevant research materials from those involved in the alleged misconduct.

Article 15. Protection of Rights and Confidentiality

1. The identity of the informant shall not be disclosed, directly or indirectly, in order to ensure protection, except where disclosure is unavoidable.

2. If an informant suffers disadvantage, discrimination, undue pressure, or harm as a result of reporting misconduct, appropriate measures shall be taken to restore the informant’s status and provide necessary protection.

3. Until the verification process is completed, care shall be taken to protect the rights and reputation of the respondent. If the respondent is found not guilty, efforts shall be made to restore their reputation.

4. All matters related to reporting, investigation, deliberation, decision-making, and subsequent actions shall be kept confidential. Any person involved, directly or indirectly, in the investigation shall not disclose any information obtained during the process. However, if disclosure is deemed necessary, it may be made upon resolution of the Committee.

Article 16. Guarantee of the Right to Appeal and Defense

The Investigation Committee shall ensure that both the informant and the respondent are given equal opportunities to present their opinions, raise objections, and defend themselves, and shall inform them in advance of the relevant procedures.

Article 17. Decision

1. The Investigation Committee shall finalize the findings and conclusions based on the investigation and any appeals or defenses, and shall notify both the informant and the respondent.

2. If consensus cannot be reached among the members of the Investigation Committee, the decision may be made by vote, requiring the presence of a majority of the members and the approval of at least two-thirds of those present.

Article 18. Submission of the Final Investigation Report

1. The Investigation Committee shall submit the final report (hereinafter referred to as the “Final Report”) to the Committee within 10 days after the decision has been made.

2. The Final Report shall include the following:

1. 1) Specific details of the allegation and the identity of the informant;
2. 2) The alleged misconduct and the related published paper(s);
3. 3) The role of the respondent in the relevant publication and whether the allegations are substantiated;
4. 4) Relevant evidence and witnesses;
5. 5) Any objections or defenses raised by the informant and the respondent, and the Committee’s response thereto;
6. 6) A list of the members of the Investigation Committee.

Chapter 5. Measures Following Verification

Article 19. Actions Based on Investigation Results

1. The Research Ethics Committee shall promptly implement disciplinary measures against any individual who has engaged in the following acts:

1. 1) Research misconduct as defined in Article 2(1);
2. 2) Acts of intentionally interfering with the investigation of alleged misconduct, whether committed by oneself or others, or acts of causing harm to an informant.

2. The Research Ethics Committee shall impose the following sanctions on members who violate the ethical regulations:

1. 1) Public disclosure of the violation on the journal and/or institute website, and notification of the author’s affiliated institution;
2. 2) Rejection of the manuscript, or retraction of a published paper;
3. 3) Suspension of membership and prohibition of manuscript submission for a minimum period of 3 years.

Article 20. Retention and Disclosure of Records

1. Records related to the preliminary and formal investigations shall be retained by the Committee for a period of 5 years following the conclusion of the investigation.

2. The Final Report may be disclosed after the decision has been finalized. However, information that may reveal the identity of the informant, witnesses, or advisors, and that could result in disadvantage to those individuals, may be excluded from disclosure.

Supplementary Provision

1. 1. This policy shall take effect from December 31, 2010.
2. 2. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2011.
3. 3. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2012.
4. 4. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2013.
5. 5. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2014.
6. 6. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2015.
7. 7. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2016.
8. 8. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2017.
9. 9. This revised policy shall take effect from July 1, 2018.
10. 10. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2018.
11. 11. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2019.
12. 12. This revised policy shall take effect from December 31, 2020.
13. 13. This revised policy shall take effect on March 31, 2026.