The Journal of Daoist Studies (JDS) is an annual publication dedicated to the scholarly exploration of Daoism in all its different dimensions. Each issue has three main parts: Academic Articles on history, philosophy, art, society, and more (limit 8,500 words); Forum on Contemporary Practice on issues of current activities both in China and other parts of the world (limit 5000 words); and News of the Field, presenting information relevant to current affairs within Daoist studies.

Publisher

Three Pines Press, 3520 9^th Ave. N, St Petersburg, FL 33713

[email protected], 727 501 6915

Editors

Friederike Assandri, Leipzig University

David Chai, Chinese University of Hong Kong

Johan Hausen, Purple Cloud Institute

Livia Kohn, Boston University

Editorial Board

Robert Allinson, Soka University

Paul D’Ambrosio, East China Normal University

Brigitte Baptandier, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Bede Bidlack, St. Anselm College

Stephan Peter Bumbacher, Basel University

Shin-yi Chao, University of Rochester

Jeffrey Dippmann, Western Washington University

Ute Engelhardt, Societas Medicinae Sinensis

Georges Favraud, University of Toulouse

Adeline Herrou, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Shih-shan Susan Huang, Rice University

Sheng Jiang, Sichuan University

Mark Meulenbeld, University of Wisconsin

David Palmer, University of Hong Kong

Elijah Siegler, College of Charleston

Thomas E. Smith, Michigan University

Dominic Steavu, University of California at Santa Barbara

Richard G. Wang, University of Florida

Robin Wang, Loyola Marymount University

Submissions: To make a submission, please contact the publisher at [email protected]. Articles are reviewed by two anonymous readers and accepted after approval. A model file with editorial instructions is available upon request. Deadline for articles is September 1 for publication in February of the following year.

To access, also contact our distributor, https://uhpress.hawaii.edu/title/jds/

Editorial Ethics

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed academic journal serves many purposes and is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is evidence for the quality and impact of the research work of its authors and by extension the institutions that support them. It is important to have standards of ethical behavior by all parties involved: author, editor, reviewer, publisher, and more.

Three Pines Press, the publisher, is dedicated to guarding over the scholarly record and integrity. We record the minutes of science and recognize our responsibilities as keepers. We are committed to ensuring that the potential for advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. We promote best practice and provide editors with Crossref Similarity Check reports for all submissions to our editorial systems. We support editors in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors and are prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.

Our editors are independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society and competent outside readers. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. Editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's board and constrained by legal requirements regarding issues such as libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. They may confer with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions.

In all cases of submissions, editors must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. They should ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and where necessary editors can seek additional opinions. They shall work with outside readers who have suitable expertise in the relevant field, avoiding the selection of fraudulent peer reviewers, and deal with disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and suggestions for self-citation made by reviewers in order to determine whether there is any potential for bias.

The journal encourages transparency and complete, honest reporting, editors ensuring that peer reviewers and authors have a clear understanding of what is expected. They work with the journal s website and the email address of the publisher for all journal communications.

Editors must not attempt to influence journal rankings by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, they shall not require that references to that (or any other) journal s articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons and authors should not be required to include references to any editors or reviewers articles or products and services in which editors or their associates have an interest. Editors may remove suggested inappropriate citations from reviewer comments before sharing with the authors.

They must also protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the publisher, editors may share limited information with editors of other journals, institutions, and other organizations that investigate cases of research misconduct where deemed necessary to investigate suspected ethical breaches.

Unless the journal is operating an open peer-review system and/or reviewers have agreed to disclose their names, editors must protect reviewers identities. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared to the publisher in writing prior to the appointment of editors, and then updated if and when new conflicts arise. The publisher may publish such declarations in the journal. Editors must not be involved in decisions about papers which s/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which editors has an interest. Further, any such submission must be subject to all of the journal s usual procedures, peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups, and there should be a clear statement to this effect on any such paper that is published.

Editors should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer and editorial), in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies. editors shall further make appropriate use of the publisher s systems for the detection of misconduct, such as plagiarism.

Editors presented with convincing evidence of misconduct should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to arrange the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction to the record, as may be relevant. They should remain up to date on all relevant policies and procedures designed to protect the integrity of the publication record, including policies that pertain to their duties and also those that pertain to the reviewers and authors.

As regards peer reviews, they serve to assist editors in making editorial decisions. Through editorial communications with the author, reviewers may also assist him or her in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the academic method. In addition to completing a thorough evaluation of the manuscript, reviewers should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should bring these to the attention of editors. This includes, but is not limited to, any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

When writing their reports, reviewers are asked to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify editors and decline to participate in the review process.

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate, and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should declare potential conflicts of interest to editors before agreeing to review a manuscript and should discuss with editors whether they need to recuse themselves because there may be a concern of potential bias. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include (but are not limited to) collaborations between the reviewer and author(s) in the previous three years, reviewers and author(s) who are based in the same institution, and reviewers and authors who have close personal relationships or associations.

Reviewers should not suggest citations to the reviewer s (or their associates ) work unless the suggested citations are for genuine academic reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer s citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates). Editors may remove inappropriate citations from reviewer comments.

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from editors. Reviewers must also respect the confidentiality of the peer review process by complying with the journal s policy on the use of generative AI and AI assisted technologies in the peer review process.

Some editors encourage discussion with colleagues or co-reviewing exercises, but reviewers should first discuss this with editors in order to ensure that confidentiality is observed and that participants receive suitable credit.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Authors submitting their reports of original research to the journal should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.

Authors may be asked to provide the research data supporting their paper for editorial review and/or to comply with the open data requirements of the journal. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable number of years after publication. They should also ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted and permission has been obtained where necessary.

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the reported work and that give the work appropriate context within the larger scholarly record. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.

Plagiarism takes many forms, from passing off the paper of another scholar as one s own, through copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of someone else s paper without attribution, to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and thus unacceptable.

Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable. By the same token, authors must not submit for consideration in another journal a paper that has been published previously, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis or as an electronic preprint.

Publication that discusses different aspects of the same original materials in more than one journal or in a journal and later in a book is justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Authors must cite relevant, timely, and verified literature to support the claims made in their article. Citations should generally be peer-reviewed. They should ensure that statements in their article based on external sources are cited accurately, present all citations so they can be verified through a permanent Digital Object or other identifier, avoid excessive and inappropriate citations to their own work, desists from excessive and inappropriate citations to the work of others, and refrain from entering into arrangements to cite the work of other authors or author groups.

Editors and reviewers may recommend that authors consult (and potentially cite) additional sources during the peer-review process for academic reasons. If an editor or reviewer suggests that an author should includes citations to their own (or their associates ) work, this must be for genuine academic reasons and not with the intention of increasing their citation count or enhancing visibility. If an author suspects citations have been suggested against this policy, they should inform editors.

Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.