1. Author qualifications

Any researcher throughout the world can submit a manuscript if the scope of the manuscript is appropriate.

2. Language

Manuscripts should be submitted in good scientific English.

3. Reporting guidelines for specific study designs

Research reports frequently omit important information. As such, reporting guidelines have been developed for a number of study designs that some journals may ask authors to follow. Authors are encouraged to also consult the reporting guidelines relevant to their specific research design. A good source of reporting guidelines is the EQUATOR Network (http://www.equator-network.org/home/) and the United States National Institutes of Health/National Library of Medicine (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/services/research_report_guide.html).

1. Submission

All manuscripts should be submitted via e-submission system available from: https://submission.ejhl.org/.

2. Peer review process

Journal of Hazard Literacy reviews all manuscripts received. A manuscript is first reviewed for its format and adherence to the aims and scope of the journal. If the manuscript meets these two criteria, it is checked for plagiarism or duplicate publication with Similarity Check. After confirming its result, it is dispatched to investigators in the field with relevant knowledge. Assuming the manuscript is sent to reviewers, Journal of Hazard Literacy waits to receive opinions from at least two reviewers. In addition, if deemed necessary, a review of statistics may be requested. The authors’ names and affiliations are removed during peer review (double-blind peer review). The acceptance criteria for all papers are based on the quality and originality of the research and its scientific significance. Acceptance of the manuscript is decided based on the critiques and recommended decision of the reviewers. An initial decision will normally be made within 5 weeks of receipt of a manuscript, and the reviewers’ comments are sent to the corresponding author by email. The corresponding author must indicate the alterations that have been made in response to the reviewers’ comments item by item. Failure to resubmit the revised manuscript within 5 weeks of the editorial decision is regarded as a withdrawal. If further revision period is required, author should contact editorial office through form mail (hazardliteracy@ewha.ac.kr). A final decision on acceptance/rejection for publication is forwarded to the corresponding author from the editor.

3. Peer review process for handling submissions from editors, employees, or members of the editorial board

All manuscripts from editors, employees, or members of the editorial board are processed same to other unsolicited manuscripts. During the review process, submitters will not engage in the selection of reviewers and decision process. Editors will not handle their own manuscripts although they are commissioned ones.

1. General requirements

The main document with manuscript text and tables should be prepared in an Microsoft Word (docx).

All manuscript pages are to be numbered at the bottom consecutively, beginning with the abstract as page 1. Neither the author’s names nor their affiliations should appear on the manuscript pages.

The authors should express all measurements according to International System (SI) units with some exceptions such as seconds, mmHg, or °C.

Only standard abbreviations should be used. Abbreviations should be avoided in the title of the manuscript. Abbreviations should be spelled out when first used in the text—for example, extensible markup language (XML)—and the use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum.

When quoting from other sources, a reference number should be cited after the author’s name or at the end of the quotation.

Manuscript preparation is different according to the publication type, including original articles, reviews, case studies, essays, training materials, editorials, book reviews, correspondence, and video clips. Other types are also negotiable with the Editorial Board.

2. Original articles

Original articles are reports of basic investigations. The manuscript for an original article should be organized in the following sequence: title page, abstract and keywords, main text (introduction, methods, results, and discussion), conflict of interest, acknowledgments, references, tables, figure legends, and figures. The figures should be received as separate files.

Title page: The following items should be included on the title page: (1) the title of the manuscript, (2) author list, (3) each author’s affiliation, (4) the name and email address of the corresponding author, (5) when applicable, the source of any research funding and a list of where and when the study has been presented in part elsewhere, and (6) a running title of fewer than 50 characters.

Abstract and keywords: The abstract should be one concise paragraph of less than 300 words in an structured format including purpose, methods, results, and conclusion. Abbreviations or references are not allowed in the abstract. Up to 5 keywords should be listed at the bottom of the abstract to be used as index terms.

Introduction: The purpose of the investigation, including relevant background information, should be described briefly. Conclusions should not be included in the Introduction.

Methods: The research plan, materials (or subjects), and methods used should be described in that order. The names and locations (city, state, and country only) of manufacturers of equipment and software should be given. Methods of statistical analysis and criteria for statistical significance should be described.

Results: The results should be presented in logical sequence in the text, tables, and figures. If resulting parameters have statistical significance, P-values should be provided, and repetitive presentation of the same data in different forms should be avoided. The results should not include material appropriate for the discussion.

Discussion: Observations pertaining to the results of the research and other related work should be interpreted for readers. New and important observations should be emphasized rather than merely repeating the contents of the results. The implications of the proposed opinion should be explained along with its limits, and within the limits of the research results, and the conclusion should be connected to the purpose of the research. In a concluding paragraph, the results and their meaning should be summarized.

ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID): ORCID of all authors should be described.

Conflict of interest: Any potential conflict of interest that could influence the authors’ interpretation of the data, such as financial support from or connections to companies, political pressure from interest groups, or academically related issues, must be stated.

Acknowledgments: All persons who have made substantial contributions, but who have not met the criteria for authorship, are to be acknowledged here.

Appendix: If any materials are not enough to be included in the main text such as questionnaires, they can be listed in the Appendix.

Supplementary materials: If there are any supplementary materials to help the understanding of readers or too great amount data to be included in the main text, it may be placed as supplementary data. Not only text, audio or video files, but also data files should be added here.

References: In the text, references should be cited with Arabic numerals in brackets, numbered in the order cited. In the references section, the references should be numbered and listed in order of appearance in the text. All authors of a cited work should be listed if there are six or fewer authors. The first six authors should be listed followed by “et al.” if there are more than six authors. If a reference has a digital object identifier (DOI), it should be supplied. Other types of references not described below should follow The NLM Style Guide for Authors, Editors, and Publishers (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine).

Journal articles:

1. Jeong GH, Huh S. Update: bibliometric analysis of publications from North Korea indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection from 1978 to July 2018. Sci Ed 2018;5:119-123. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.135

2. Seo JW, Chung H, Seo TS, Jung Y, Hwang ES, Yun C, et al. Equality, equity, and reality of open access on scholarly information. Sci Ed 2017;4:58-69. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.97

Books and book chapters:

3. Morris S, Barnas E, LaFrenier D, Reich M. The handbook of journal publishing. Cambridge University Press; 2013.

4. Cho HM, editor. KOFST journals 2011. The Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies; 2012.

5. Booth BA. Peer review. In: Coghill AM, Garson LR, editors. The ACS style guide. 3rd ed. Oxford University Press; 2006. p. 71-76.

Online sources:

6. Committee on Publication Ethics. Guidelines for retracting articles [Internet]. Committee on Publication Ethics; 2009 [cited 2023 Sep 20]. Available from: http://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf

7. Testa J. The Thomson Reuters journal selection process [Internet]. Thomson Reuters; 2012 [cited 2013 Sep 30]. Available from: http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal-selection-process/

Conference papers:

8. Shell ER. Sex and the scientific publisher: how journals and journalists collude (despite their best intentions) to mislead the public. Paper presented at: 2011 CrossRef Annual Member Meeting; 2011 Nov 14-15; Cambridge, MA.

9. Kim HW. Challenges and future directions on journal “perspectives in nursing science” in Korea. Poster session presented at: Asia Pacific Association of Medical Journal Editors Convention 2013; 2013 Aug 2-4; Tokyo, Japan.

Scientific and technical reports:

10. Kim SN, Park JR, Bae HS, Kown KW, Joo DB, Lim ST, et al. A study on the meta evaluation of Korean university evaluation. Korean Educational Development Institute; 2004. Report No.: CR 2004-45.

News articles:

11. Kim R. SNU ranked 51st in university evaluation. Korean Times [Internet]. 2007 Nov 8 [cited 2013 Sep 25]. Available from: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2007/11/117_13423.html

Dissertations:

12. Kim K. Quantum critical phenomena in superfluids and superconductors [dissertation]. California Institute of Technology; 1991.

Tables: Tables are to be numbered in the order in which they are cited in the text. A table title should concisely describe the content of the table so that a reader can understand the table without referring to the text. Each table must be simple and typed on a separate page with its heading above it. Explanatory matter is placed in footnotes below the tabular matter and not included in the heading. All non-standard abbreviations are explained in the footnotes. Footnotes should be indicated by 1), 2), 3), and so on. Statistical measures such as SD or SE should be identified. Vertical rules and horizontal rules between entries should be omitted.

Figures and legends for illustrations: Figures should be numbered, using Arabic numerals, in the order in which they are cited. Each figure is recommended to be uploaded as an uncompressed image file in EPS, TIFF, PSD, JPEG, or PPT format at 300 dpi or 3 million pixels (less than 6 megabytes) or larger, and can be embedded in a word file. Authors may be asked to resubmit poor quality figures in good quality. Written permission should be obtained for the use of all previously published illustrations (and copies of permission letters should be included). In the case of multiple prints bearing the same number, English letters should be used after the numerals to indicate the correct order (e.g. Fig. 1A; Fig. 2B, 2C).

3. Reviews

Reviews should be comprehensive analyses of specific topics. They are to be organized as follows: title page, abstract and keywords, main text (introduction, text, and conclusion), conflict interest, acknowledgments, references, tables, figure legends, and figures. There should be an unstructured abstract of no more than 200 words.

4. Editorials

Editorials are invited by the editor and should be commentaries on articles published recently in the journal. Editorial topics could include active areas of research, fresh insights, and debates in all fields of journal publication.

5. Book reviews

Book reviews will cover recently published books in the field of journal publication. The format is same as that of Editorials.

6. Correspondence

Correspondence (letters to the editor) may be in response to a published article, or a short, free-standing piece expressing an opinion.

In reply: If the Correspondence is in response to a published article, the Editor-in-Chief may choose to invite the article’s authors to write a Correspondence Reply.

1. Final version

After the paper has been accepted for publication, the author(s) should submit the final version of the manuscript. The names and affiliations of the authors should be double-checked, and if the originally submitted image files were of poor resolution, higher resolution image files should be submitted at this time. The electronic original should be sent with appropriate labeling and arrows. The EPS, TIFF, Adobe Photoshop (PSD), JPEG, and PPT formats are preferred for submission of digital files of photographic images. Symbols (e.g., circles, triangles, squares), letters (e.g., words, abbreviations), and numbers should be large enough to be legible on reduction to the journal’s column widths. All of the symbols must be defined in the figure caption. If the symbols are too complex to appear in the caption, they should appear on the illustration itself, within the area of the graph or diagram, not to the side. If references, tables, or figures are moved, added, or deleted during the revision process, they should be renumbered to reflect such changes so that all tables, references, and figures are cited in numeric order.

2. Manuscript corrections

Before publication, the manuscript editor may correct the manuscript such that it meets the standard publication format. The author(s) must respond within 2 days when the manuscript editor contacts the author for revisions. If the response is delayed, the manuscript’s publication may be postponed to the next issue.

3. Galley Proof

The author(s) will receive the final version of the manuscript as a PDF file. Upon receipt, within 2 days, the editorial office (or printing office) must be notified of any errors found in the file. Any errors found after this time are the responsibility of the author(s) and will have to be corrected as an erratum.