Instructions for AuthOrs

3. Submission Deadlines 

December 10, April 10, August 10

(Online Release Date: January 31, May 31, September 30)

4. Peer Review

This journal operates a double anonymized review process. All contributions will be initially assessed by the editor for suitability for the journal. Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to assess the quality of the paper. The Editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of articles. The Editor's decision is final. Editors are not involved in decisions about papers which they have written themselves or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures, with peer review handled independently of the relevant editor and their research groups.

The sent paper will be given ‘Publication’, ‘Publication(Direct)’, ‘Re-review after Revision’ or ‘Declined of Publication’: 

■ Requesting for Correcting the File (After Submission)

If you have made an error in submitting your manuscript (e.g., uploaded the wrong file, left one or more files out, etc.), please e-mail the TechArt: Journal of Arts and Imaging Science assistant to notify us and make corrections. 

■ Submitting Final Publication Materials

If the sent paper is accepted for publication after review process, we will send you a detailed guide and an author checklist for final paper submission requirements. Please be advised to pay close attention to the detailed requirements. You are supposed to send the final manuscript along with author’s photos and read copyright transfer form. You can download the copyright transfer form below:  Download

The paper is conditionally accepted with some requirements. A revision means that the paper should go back to the original reviewers for a second round of reviews. 

We strongly discourage editors from making a decision based on their own review of the manuscript if a revision had been previously required.

5. Publication Ethics

■ Ethical guidelines for authors 

a. Plagiarism 

Authors submitting to TechArt: Journal of Arts and Imaging Science must warrant that their manuscript does not contain presentation of research or opinion of another person as their own. All results of research conducted by another person or entity must be cited with the source. Although it is acceptable to include references several times, it is considered plagiarism when a portion of the source is falsely presented as one’s own finding.

b. Authorship

  1)  Authors are held accountable and acknowledged only for the research they actually conducted or contributed to. 

 2) The order of authors (or translators) must accurately reflect the level of contribution to the research regardless of their relative status or position. One cannot be entitled as the first author merely due to one’s position. Also, one must not submit a co-authored research article as one’s individual work. Minor contributions to the research or article should be appropriately indicated either in a footnote, introduction, or acknowledgements. 

c. Previously published work

Authors must not submit or try to publish work previously published by the author in Korea or overseas as new research. Authors must declare that the submitted manuscript is not a duplicate of a previously published work and is not plagiarized by submitting the Research Ethics Agreement form with the manuscript.

d. Citations and references

Authors must cite and reference publications and ideas by another person or entity in footnotes, thereby informing readers what is part of existing literature and what is the author’s original idea, opinion, and interpretation.

e. Revision of manuscript

Authors should accommodate the comments of the editors and reviewers and revise the article accordingly. If the author disagrees with the reviewed comments, the author should notify the editorial committee of the rationale.

■ Ethical guidelines for editors 

a. Editors’ responsibilities and obligations

Editors are responsible for the decisions to accept or reject a manuscript. Editors must respect the authors’ individuality as an independent scholar.

b. Basic principles for editors

Editors must give unbiased consideration to each manuscript solely based on the manuscript’s merit and the submission guidelines, without regard to sex, age, institutional affiliation of the author(s), or personal relationship with the author(s) and without any prejudice against the author(s).

c. Principles for the selection of peer reviewers

Editors must request the evaluation and review of the submitted manuscript to experts in the relevant field who has the ability to make unbiased judgment. Editors must ensure the reviewers do not receive the authors’ personal data by not disclosing the authors’ identities to the reviewers, thereby assuring the best possible objectivity in the review process.

■ Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers 

a. Meeting the evaluation deadline

Reviewers should provide a constructive evaluation report of the submitted manuscript to the journal’s editorial committee within the set deadline. If a reviewer has a conflict of interest and deems unsuitable to review the manuscript, the reviewer should notify this immediately to the editorial committee.

b. Basic principles for evaluation

Reviewers must give unbiased evaluation of the submitted manuscript without regard to the reviewer’s personal academic principle or relationship with the author(s). Reviewers must not reject the manuscript on insufficient grounds or from conflict of the reviewer’s point of view or interpretation with those of the author(s). Reviewers must not review the manuscript without properly reading the submitted manuscript.

c. Guarantee of author’s individuality

Reviewers must respect the author’s individuality as an independent scholar with expert knowledge in the field. Reviewers may indicate their judgment in the review report, and should give detailed reasons and explanation for comments suggesting revisions by the author. Reviewers should use courteous and moderate expressions in their reports and must avoid making statements that disparage or disrespect the author(s).

d. Guarantee of author’s anonymity

Reviewers must keep the review process of the submitted manuscript confidential. Unless it is essential for the review process to seek external advice, the manuscript must not be shared or discussed with anyone outside the peer review process.

■  Application of ethics policy 

a. Ethics Agreement

Editors and peer reviewers of TechArt: Journal of Arts and Imaging Science are expected to adhere to the ethical guidelines upon appointment. Authors are expected to adhere to the ethical guidelines upon submission of manuscript.

b. Report of breach of ethics guidelines and guarantee of confidentiality

Where a breach of ethics policy is found or suspected, this should be reported to the research ethics committee. The ethics committee must not externally disclose the identity of the person undergoing investigation until the institute decides what disciplinary action will be taken.

c. Rights of ethics committee

The ethics committee has the right to conduct extensive investigation of the allegations through communication with the complainant, the respondent, and witnesses and through supporting evidences. Where facts of breaches of ethics guidelines are established, the ethics committee has the right to suggest the appropriate disciplinary action to the Executive Director of Institute.

d. Investigation and review by the ethics committee

The person suspected of breaching the ethics guidelines must cooperate with the investigation conducted by the ethics committee. Refusing to cooperate with the investigation is itself considered a breach of the ethics guidelines.

e. Respondent’s notice and guarantee of appeal

The person suspected of breaching the ethics guidelines has the right to appeal to the committee’s disciplinary decision and must be given sufficient opportunity to set out the arguments. The ethics committee must appropriately guarantee that the appellant will be given the opportunity to defend oneself and present one’s arguments.

f. Disciplinary procedure

Where the ethics committee proposes a disciplinary action, the Executive Director of institute convenes an editorial committee and finalizes the disciplinary decision and actions. A manuscript judged to have breached the ethics guidelines will be rejected in the first screening. A published article will be deleted from the journal’s database and will notify this to relevant academic institutions. Authors who breached the research ethics will be restricted from submission for the ensuing 5 years.