The Editorial Committee of ETRI Journal is composed of members of ETRI along with professionals from research institutes and universities throughout Korea and the rest of the world. Each member of the committee is an expert with a distinguished record in one of the research areas covered by the journal. The Editorial Committee of ETRI Journal is responsible for making the final decision on every manuscript, for making that decision in as timely a manner as possible under the given conditions, and for ensuring that the decision is based on a fair and objective analysis of the manuscript's merits.
Once a paper is assigned to an editor, the editor performs an initial prescreening to determine whether or not the paper fits the interests of ETRI Journal's readers. If the Editorial Committee feels the manuscript meets the journal's standards for publication, the paper then enters a blind reviewing process.
The editor generally selects three reviewers for each paper. However, one or two review(s) may be sufficient for the Editorial Committee to make a decision. Authors do not know the identities of the reviewers and reviewers do not know the identities of the authors. The reviewers use a standard review form provided by ETRI Journal. The editor chooses reviewers on the basis of peer networking, current references cited in the manuscript or other related recent publications, and author/reviewer recommendations. The editor adds more reviewers if there have not been enough reviews received to make a decision and there are not enough reviews in progress.
A regular paper can be reevaluated after the authors' revision if the manuscript contains enough originality and if the editor believes that revision could surely improve the quality of the work such that it could be accepted after reevaluation with minimum delay. A reevaluation of a special-issue paper can be allowed only when it can be done without delaying the whole publication schedule of the special issue. A letter cannot normally be considered for reevaluation.
For a revision, the authors are allowed two months to revise their manuscript for reevaluation and one month to revise their paper for final decision by the Editorial Committee. The authors should respond to every comment by the reviewers and highlight the revised parts in the manuscript. Failure to submit revision and responses within the allowed time limit leads to rejection.
To consider acceptance of a manuscript, at least two positive reviews are required: that is, two 'publish as is' or 'minor revision' recommendations. If there are any negative reviews (that is, 'major revision' or 'reject'), the number should be less than the number of positive reviews, and the editor should be able to provide superseding reasons against their criticism. A reject-recommended manuscript cannot be accepted unless its assigned editor provides convincing reasons for the decision that can supersede the reviewer's reject recommendation and the other editors agree with the assigned editor. In the case of letters, if at least one review suggests a 'major revision,' this should result in rejection.
In 2013, of 1,536 papers submitted, 152 were published.
ETRI Journal has four kinds of annual awards: Best Paper Award, Paper of the Year Award, Best Reviewer Award, and Best Editor Award. Two recipients of the Best Paper Awards are selected based on citations and evaluation by the reviewers: one among ETRI papers and one among non-ETRI papers, all published within the past three years. Two recipients of the Paper of the Year Awards are selected based on evaluation by the reviewers: one among ETRI papers, one among non-ETRI papers, all published within the year. Recipients of the Best Reviewer Award and the Best Editor Award are selected based on their contribution to ETRI Journal during the year.
Editors and reviewers must keep confidential all material in manuscripts to which they have access. If an assigned editor has any conflict of interest with the authors of an assigned paper, the editor should return the paper to the editorial office immediately so that the paper can be assigned to another editor. Editors and reviewers should make an effort to carry out a good review and provide fair, objective, and serious treatment for every paper. Misconduct such as plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, and double submission cannot be accepted in any case. If a paper is alleged to have such misconduct, the corresponding author will be required to respond within 2 weeks. No response or unsatisfactory response will lead to rejection of the paper, and the allegation of misconduct will be reported to the authors' research institution as well.