Peer Review Process

Guidelines & Policies

All manuscripts submitted to Culinary Science & Hospitality Research (CSHR) undergo rigorous double-blind peer review. This policy is based on the Manuscript Review Regulations of the Culinary Society of Korea and governs the method and procedure of review applied by the Editorial Board.

1. Review Model

CSHR operates a double-blind peer review process. Each submitted manuscript is assigned to two or more reviewers judged suitable for the subject matter. The identities and affiliations of reviewers and authors are kept anonymous to one another throughout the process. Before review begins, every manuscript is briefly checked by a Managing Editor for validity and scope (pre-review).

2. Reviewer Qualifications and Assignment

Reviewers hold a doctoral degree at the rank of assistant professor or above and have a sustained record of research relevant to the manuscript's field. Social-science manuscripts are assigned to reviewers in culinary science, tourism, foodservice management, hotel management, or institutional foodservice management; natural-science manuscripts are assigned to reviewers in the relevant fields of science, agriculture, or engineering. English-language submissions are assigned to reviewers competent to review in English. Reviewers are selected with attention to subject-matter fit and regional balance.

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate each manuscript on its suitability as a scholarly article, the appropriateness of the research method, the completeness of the content, the diligence of the writing, the accuracy of citations and references, the originality of the topic, the scholarly contribution of the findings, the adequacy of the abstract, and whether the work has been published elsewhere.

4. Evaluation Outcomes

Reviewers return a decision in one of four categories. Reviewers submit results within two weeks; a reviewer who does not respond within fifteen days may be released and replaced.

Accept

The research method, analysis, and conclusions are complete and require no revision, aside from minor wording corrections. The paper is ready for publication.

Accept after Minor Revision

The manuscript requires some revision, after which Editorial Board review confirms suitability. A minor revision usually means only textual changes are needed, and only the Editor needs to validate that the revised paper has met the suggested changes.

Revise and Re-review

Significant errors are found — in the title, abstract, introduction, sampling, estimation, research model, experiment, data, analysis, or logic — that require revision and a further round of review to confirm the validity and suitability of the revised manuscript.

Reject

The manuscript contains critical errors, is unsuitable for the Society's scholarly standards, has already been published, is suspected of plagiarism, or would adversely affect the Society. Authors may revise substantially and submit again at a later date, in which case the work is treated as a new submission.

5. Review Procedure

  1. The Editor(-in-Chief) receives the submitted manuscript.
  2. The Editor assigns the manuscript to two or more reviewers.
  3. Reviewers complete the review and submit a review report to the Editor.
  4. The Editor notifies the corresponding author of the result, with reviewer identity withheld.
  5. The corresponding author submits the revised manuscript and an item-by-item response report.
  6. The Editor refers the revised manuscript back to the reviewers, with author identity withheld.
  7. Reviewers re-review the revised manuscript and submit a re-review report.
  8. The Editor notifies the corresponding author of the re-review result; further rounds repeat as needed.
  9. When review is complete, the Editor determines publication based on the full record of drafts, revisions, and review reports.

6. Final Decision

The Editorial Board determines final publication. Where one reviewer returns a "reject" decision on grounds the Editor-in-Chief deems serious, or where a revised manuscript again receives a "revise and re-review" decision, the manuscript is treated as rejected. Second-round decisions follow resolution by the Editorial Board, whose decision is final and is communicated to the author. Failure to resubmit a revised manuscript within the stated period is regarded as a withdrawal; the editorial office should be notified if additional time is needed.

Authors can track the progress of a manuscript on the journal's submission website: https://cshr.jams.or.kr.

These regulations were first enacted in 2003 and revised continuously, most recently in January 2026. The full Korean-language text of the Manuscript Review Regulations is available on the Culinary Society of Korea website.