The editorial policy for the Journal of Biblical and Ancient Studies

Chapter 1. General Provisions

 Article 1. Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to govern all aspects of the editing of the Journal of Biblical and Ancient Studies (hereinafter referred to as JBAS) published by the Johannine Literature Studies of Korea (hereinafter referred to as JLSK).

Chapter 2. The Editorial Board's Composition and Function

Article 2. Editorial Board Composition

The following shall make up the Editorial Board.

1. The editorial board consists of an editor-in-chief and at least 14 editorial board members.

2. Following a resolution by JLSK's executive committee, the president appoints the editor-in-chief in line with Article 8, Section 4 of the constitution's rules.

3. The president appoints the editorial board members following consultation with the editor-in-chief and the president or executive committee of the JLSK.

4. Members of the editorial board have a two-year tenure; however, they are eligible for reappointment.

5. The editorial board reviews, edits, and publishes manuscripts for "The Bible and Ancient Literature," the official journal of the Korean Johannine Literature Society, along with other scholarly works.

6. If necessary, the editorial board may create distinct operating guidelines.

Article 3. Requirements and Selection Standards for Members of the Editorial Board

The editorial board members are scholars specializing in the JBAS. Following suggestions from the editor-in-chief and the JLSK ’s president and executive committee, as well as after consultation with the editor-in-chief, the president of the JLKS appoints them.

1. The editorial board should remain unbiased regarding issues, perspectives, or research methods concerning the JBAS.

2. The editorial board's membership shouldn't be skewed toward any particular area, institution, or school.

3. In principle, the members of the editorial board shall be those who are engaged in research in the field of the Bible and ancient literature and who hold a doctorate, are full-time lecturers or above at universities, and are full-time researchers or above at equivalent research institutions. However, if the editor-in-chief deems it necessary for the composition of the editorial board, he/she may appoint an editorial board member from among those who have made significant research achievements or are recognized for their outstanding research capabilities.

Article 4. The role of the editor-in-chief

If required, the role of the editor-in-chief may include requests for materials (such as survey analysis data) used in the production of submitted publications.

1. Notification of the call for manuscripts to be published in the JBAS.

2. Selection of members for the editorial and review boards

3. Convene the editorial board.

4. The final decision on the manuscript's publication

5. Additional issues pertaining to the JBAS editing and publication.

Article 5. The Editorial Board's Role

1. The editor-in-chief calls a meeting of the editorial board, which discusses and makes decisions on the following issues.

1) Assessing the appropriateness of manuscripts submitted

2) Recommend and endorse reviewers to review submitted manuscripts.

3) Approving a decision to publish a submitted manuscript

4) Establish and revise policies for reviewing submitted manuscripts.

2. A majority of the members of the editorial committee should be present for the resolution to be approved, and the majority of those present must concur. The same applies when making decisions online.

3. If required, the editorial board may take the following actions to enhance the JBAS and guarantee the impartiality of the review criteria.

1) Manuscripts that have been published in other academic journals, are under review, or are abstracts of previously published books and research reports cannot be submitted. If this is discovered at a later date, the Editorial Board shall cancel the publication of already published papers and halt the review of papers under review by appropriate procedures.

2) If the editorial board determines that there is a problem with the final review results, it may choose to go through a fresh review procedure.

3) The editorial board may request documents (such as surveys and analysis data) that were utilized in the preparation of the submission, if necessary.

Chapter 3. Publishing the JBAS

Article 6. Manuscript Submission

The following is the procedure and method for submitting manuscripts.

1. Manuscript Preparation: The editorial board's format must be followed when preparing the manuscript.

2. Manuscript Submission: While manuscripts are welcome at any time, they are deemed submitted whenever the editorial board receives the printed or electronic copy.

3. Notification of Submission: Upon the submission of a manuscript, the editorial board shall notify the author of the submission.

Article 7. Publication Schedule 

The JBAS shall be published twice a year on June 30 and December 31 of each year.

Chapter 4. Review Procedures and Criteria

Article 8. Initial Review

The editor-in-chief requests the initial review of manuscripts received on a weekly basis.

1. Appointment of reviewers: The editorial chairperson shall request the editorial board members to judge the suitability of the contributed articles and recommend reviewers and appoint at least two reviewers based on the opinions of the editorial board members.

2. Request for Review: The designated reviewers are asked to examine the work and send an email or use the manuscript submission system to complete the review request and review result notification forms. The review request form and the review outcome notification form follow the format the editorial board established.

3. Due date: The editor-in-chief may, at their discretion, replace the reviewer and provide the newly assigned reviewer the review deadline if the original review results are not reported within three weeks without specific reasons. Generally, the results of the review should be received within two weeks.

4. Review Criteria: Reviewers must apply the following review criteria to fairly and objectively assess the work.

1) Appropriateness of the topic and title (10 points): Do the topic and title fall within the scope of the JBAS and comprehensively reflect the content?

2) Originality and Creativity of the Topic (10 points): Does the topic showcase the researcher's own perspective and enhance or replace preexisting ideas and interpretations?

3) Problem statement appropriateness, objective clarity, and persuasiveness (10 points): Is the problem statement appropriate, and are the research's purpose and necessity expressed in an understandable and convincing manner?

4) Method validity and appropriateness (10 points): Was the research methodology conducted in a way that was both valid and acceptable for the topic and the purpose?

5) Argument Clarity, Logical Development, and Argumentation Consistency (10 points): Is the argument given in a clear and coherent manner, and is the process of logical development and argumentation properly and consistently organized?

6) Completeness and Results of the Research (10 points): Is the research content well-organized, and are the research results presented in a valid and clear manner?

7) Comprehensiveness of Related Literature (Previous Research) and Data Analysis (10 points): Does the study include pertinent citations, analyze preexisting ideas, and offer fresh perspectives that advance knowledge of the topic?

8) Clarity of Expression and Appropriateness (10 points): Are the theories, concepts, terminology, expressions, images, and ideas used clear and appropriate?

9) Adherence to Paper Format (5 points): Does it adhere to the JBAS's submission guidelines and manuscript format?

10) Accuracy of references, footnotes, and citations (5 points): Do the references, footnotes, and citations in the text adhere to the JBAS citation style?

11) Academic Value (10 points): Does the manuscript advance the JBAS and the field of study in question?

5. Notification of Decision: The final judgment shall be rendered on the findings of the manuscript review, which were gathered in compliance with the submission standards. The authors of the accepted manuscripts shall be notified, and they shall be asked to provide the final manuscript and materials. The authors of manuscripts that need to be reevaluated shall be informed, and they shall be asked to submit the updated manuscript along with a synopsis of the changes. Within a week or so, the updated manuscript should be turned in.

6. Criteria for Evaluation: The following table is used to establish the manuscript review's findings.

If the original review's findings lead to a re-evaluation decision for a manuscript, the following procedures apply.

1. Review: The reviewers who first suggested conditional acceptance are asked to reevaluate the manuscript once it has been amended. The time frame for re-evaluation is roughly one week.

2. Decision and Notification: The result of the review shall be determined in accordance with the review criteria in Article 8, Section 4, and notified to the author in the same manner as the initial review.

Article 10. Finalization and Publication

The final manuscript shall be compiled and published in the following manner.

1. Author correction: The final manuscript for printing is prepared after a one-week period of author correction for the manuscript that has been confirmed for publication.

2. Publication: The manuscript shall be published after the editorial board has confirmed the publication format, following the completion of the author corrections.

Article 11. Management of Papers Rejected for Publication

The author shall be notified of manuscripts that are deemed unpublishable, and the reasons for rejection shall be specified in the name of the editor-in-chief or the editorial board. However, submitted manuscripts shall not be returned. Nevertheless, the manuscript may be fundamentally revised and resubmitted after six months from the final judgment date.

 Article 12. Objection

If a paper that was initially deemed "published after revision" is deemed "unpublishable" in the re-review, the author may submit an objection within 10 days of receiving the judgment notification. The objection must include specific reasons and supporting documents. The editor-in-chief is required to refer the adoption of the third review to the editorial board upon receiving the objection. The editorial board shall deliberate and make a decision within 14 days of receipt.

A third review shall be conducted by appointing two new reviewers who are not members of the initial review panel if the objection is determined to be legitimate. Experts in the pertinent discipline shall be recommended and appointed at this time. The initial and second review manuscripts, the manuscript revision page, and the review comments shall be provided to the appointed reviewers for their evaluation. The manuscript shall be approved if at least one of the two reviewers issues a "publication/acceptance" verdict, as the third review is limited to determining "acceptance" or "rejection." No additional objections shall be permitted; the final decision shall be confirmed following a review by the editorial board and the editor-in-chief. The initial rejection decision shall be confirmed if the objection is determined to be invalid.

Article 13. Confidentiality of Review Content

The editorial board is required to maintain the anonymity of the reviewers and is prohibited from disclosing the content of the review results to any individual other than the author. Nevertheless, the editorial board may facilitate the exchange of mutual feedback if the author requests it and the reviewer consents.

 Article 14. Academic Award Recommendation

Manuscripts that are deemed "Recommended for Excellent Paper Award" during the review process within approximately one week of submission, as well as those that are deemed "Recommended for Excellent Paper Award" by reviewers after acceptance, are acknowledged as recommendations for the academic award in the paper category. The editorial board is informed of the specifics.

 Article 15. Deferred Publication of Papers

Even if a manuscript has been approved for publication, it may be postponed at the author's request or in accordance with the editorial board's publication schedule.

 Article 16 Certificate of Acceptance for Publication, etc.

The Certificate of Publication or the Certificate of Adoption for Publication shall be issued upon the author's request following the adoption of the manuscript or the publication of the JBAS, respectively.

 Article 17. Scientific Misconduct

If research misconduct such as plagiarism, etc., is found in manuscripts published in the JBAS, it shall be handled according to a separate research ethics guideline.

Additional provisions

This policy shall take effect on June 10, 2025.