Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

  • HOME
  • About JCPC
  • Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture (JCPC) is a peer-reviewed international journal published by the Institute of Confucian Philosophy and Culture, Sungkyunkwan University. Founded in 2001, JCPC (ISSN 1598-267X) is published biannually (in February and August) and welcomes the contribution of both articles and book reviews. The editors of JCPC are committed to insuring the integrity of its published content and toward that end all authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial and advisory boards associated with the journal are expected to fully adhere to our publication ethics and malpractice policies as described below.


All authors must adhere to the following regulations; they must insure:

1. That their submissions are original research not previously published or under consideration for publication elsewhere and that they have taken all necessary precautions to avoid breach of copyright.

2. That they provide appropriate citation of all previously published works.

3. That they provide two versions of their manuscript in a format that complies with the journal's stated requirements, one disclosing academic rank and affiliation, one anonymous and intended for blind review.

4. That they disclose to the editors any conflicts of interest that may influence or appear to influence the integrity of the work submitted. For example, all sources of financial support for the research leading to the submission must be disclosed.

5. That all persons who have made significant written contributions to the submitted work be acknowledged as co-authors and the approximate contributions of all co-authors be clearly stated.

6. That they immediately inform the editors of any significant errors or problems with the submitted work that they might discover prior to or after publication so that the editors can either correct or retract the paper or acknowledge published mistakes that come to their attention.


All reviewers must adhere to the following regulations; they must:

1. Evaluate submissions purely on the basis of their intellectual merit and conformity with the stated aims and requirements of the JCPC.

2. Immediately inform the editors of JCPC in the case of any potential conflict of interest. For example, if the reviewer recognizes the author by the work and has any close professional or personal relationship with the author that might influence her or his judgement.

3. Maintain strict confidentiality in regard to the manuscripts they review. Reviewers may choose to share their identities with authors in cases in which the manuscript is accepted but they are not to share the manuscripts or any parts thereof without first securing the explicit permission of the author.

4. If they choose not to review a given submission, state briefly their reasons for declining.

5. Assume that their reviews will be communicated to the authors and so should take care to make clear any comments they intend only for the editors.


The editors are responsible for insuring that the review process is fair, swift, and as transparent as possible. In particular, they are tasked with implementing and maintaining the standards and process of peer review described in the following section. They are also responsible for investigating and deciding any apparent cases of misconduct that they perceive or that are brought to their attention as described in the concluding two sections of this statement of publication ethics and malpractice.

Peer Review Process

The editors of JCPC read all submissions and make an initial judgment about whether to submit a received paper to the process of peer review. The editors may reject a paper without peer review if its topic or content fall outside the journal's stated mandate, is of poor quality, or does not comply with the journal's stated format. A decision not to send a paper for peer review will not be influenced by an editor's views about the authors or their home institution; the Editor-in-Chief will communicate the reasons for not advancing a given submission to the author.

If a submission is deemed appropriate in topic, content, quality, and format it will be sent out to two reviewers with the requisite expertise needed to evaluate the work for publication. Reviewers are asked to complete their reviews within two months of receipt and to provide clear reasons for judging the submission to be in one of the following four categories:

Publish (as is) Publish after minor revisions (to be noted in the evaluation) Revise and resubmit Reject

JCPC applies double-blind peer review, the identity of both the author and reviewer is kept hidden. Authors can identify potential conflicts of interest and provide the names of up to two "opposed reviewers" at the time of submission. Authors are required to explain the reasons why identified opposed reviewers should not be asked to evaluate their work. While the editors of JCPC will give serious consideration to such identified opposed reviewers, they retain the right to invite whomever they deem appropriate and cannot guarantee that "opposed reviewers" will not be invited.

The editors will make the final decision concerning each submission and their reasons will be clearly communicated both to authors and their reviewers.

To help broaden and strengthen its cadre of potential reviewers, JCPC assumes that authors whose papers have been accepted by the journal agree to serve as reviewers for other manuscripts submitted to the journal.


Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable; any suspicion of plagiarism will be vigorously investigated by the editors. If confirmed, plagiarism is sufficient grounds for immediate rejection of a submission and the offending authors will be banned from making further submissions to the journal.

Recycling of one's own previously published work should be avoided as much as possible and if deemed excessive by reviewers or editors can be grounds for rejecting a given submission. When the duplication of previous work is necessary for advancing a new argument or line of inquiry, the cited work must be properly cited and the extent of overlap with the previously published essay(s) must be clearly indicated in the submission itself.

Procedures Concerning Reports of Misconduct

The editors are committed to maining the highest ethical standards in managing the business of the journal and we encourage anyone who suspects misconduct to contact us immediately. Every report of suspected misconduct will be investigated collectively by the editorial team: i.e., the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, and managing editor.

Under normal circumstances, the Editor-in-Chief is responsible for leading all investigations brought to the attention of the editorial team. Should the Editor-in-Chief be accused or implicated in a charge of misconduct, the Associate Editor will take responsibility for the investigation.

As part of the investigation the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor will contact both parties involved in any conflict; they will explain and ask them to respond to the accusation and will study and if need be further investigate their responses. No decision will be reached and no action will be taken without sufficient evidence of misconduct.

If the case involves another journal, its Editor-in-Chief will be contacted and both editorial teams will investigate and work to arrive at a shared decision.

The editors of JCPC fully endorse the International Standards for Editors and the International Standards for Authors published by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics),