Publication Process

The journal has the publication process as follows:

(1) The author submits the article into the system.

(2) The editor informs the author that “The article has been received.”

(3) Check the reference list of the article (both the reference list in footnote format and at the end of the article) whether it is correct according to the format specified in “Author Guidelines”.

          (3.1) If correct, proceed in accordance with (4).

          (3.2) If not correct, the editor will inform the author to correct it. After correction, the author can continue to proceed according to (4). Notwithstanding, if the author does not correct it, the editor will inform the authors that this article is "not accepted for consideration".

(4) The journal reviewing committee considers the articles and the editor notifies the authors, as the case may be, as follows:

          (4.1) In the case of accepting articles for consideration, the editor will Inform the authors that the article is “received for consideration” and proceed in accordance with (5).

          (4.2) In the case of not accepting articles for consideration, the editor will Inform the authors that the article is “not accepted for consideration” and specify the reason for not accepting the article for consideration to the authors.

(5) The journal committee considers appointing a peer reviewer to assess the quality of the article and the editor will inform the authors that the article is “under quality assessment by qualified reviewers”.

Note: “Research Articles” and “Academic Articles”, the journal committee will consider appointing 3 reviewers per article.

(6) The quality assessment of articles by qualified reviewers can be divided into 3 levels as follows:

          (6.1) deems appropriate to publish without further correction

          (6.2) deems appropriate to publish but needs to make further corrections

          (6.3) deems appropriate to reject publication

Note: In the case of “Research Articles” and “Academic Articles”, if the results of the article quality assessment are not unanimous, the decision shall be determined by the majority of the reviewers. In the case of “Other Types of Articles”, if one reviewer considers an article deems appropriate to publish, but another reviewer considers the article deems appropriate to refuse publication, the committee of journals will consider appointing a third reviewer to review the article. The decision of the third reviewer shall be final.

(7) The editor informs the author of the results of the article quality assessment according to (6).

          (7.1) In the case of (6.1), it shall proceed according to (8).

          (7.2) In the case of (6.2), the editor will check whether the author has made any further amendments. If further amendments have been made, it shall continue to proceed under (8). However, if the amendment is not made without reasonable grounds, the editor will inform the authors that this article is "Rejected for Publication"

(8) The article is proofread.

(9) The article is published.