I. Internal Code of Conduct

1. Academic Integrity

All members of the editorial board shall uphold the highest standards of academic honesty.
Editors must not:

• Fabricate, alter, or manipulate any part of a submission.

• Committee members and Theodore Review staff have the right to submit their own articles, but must comply with all disciplinary and ethical standards Can be published after double-blind review.
  
  

• Introduce personal views into editorial decisions.
  
  

• Use confidential submission materials for personal benefit.
  
  

Any violation results in immediate removal from the editorial board.

2. Impartiality and Non-Bias

Editors must evaluate submissions based solely on:

• Quality of argument
  
  

• Rigor of evidence
  
  

• Originality of insight
  
  

• Clarity of expression
  
  

Evaluation shall not be influenced by:

• Author identity or background
  
  

• Nationality, gender, race
  
  

• School affiliation
  
  

• Personal relationships
  
  

3. Confidentiality

All manuscripts under review are strictly confidential.

Editors may not:

• Share submissions outside the editorial board
  
  

• Discuss manuscripts with friends, teachers, or parents
  
  

• Reveal the identity of reviewers
  
  

• Reveal the identity of authors during the review process
  
  

This applies before, during, and after publication.

4. Professional Communication

Editorial communication must remain:

• Courteous
  
  

• Constructive
  
  

• Timely
  
  

• Procedurally consistent
  
  

Editors must reply to internal messages within 48 hours to maintain operational flow.

5. Conflict of Interest

Editors must not participate in reviewing:

• Their own submissions
  
  

• Submissions by close friends
  
  

• Submissions by teammates
  
  

• Submissions where personal interest is involved
  
  

Such manuscripts must be reassigned to another editor.

6. Workload & Responsibility

Editors must complete:

• Initial screening within 7 days
  
  

• Peer review coordination within 14–21 days
  
  

• Final decision within 28–35 days
  
  

Failure to meet deadlines repeatedly results in reassignment of responsibilities.

II. Peer Review Workflow

Theodore Review follows a three-stage editorial process modeled after undergraduate academic journals.

Stage 1: Initial Screening｜Timeline: 1 week

Handled by:

• Editor-in-Chief
  
  

• Section Editors
  
  

We evaluate:

• Relevance to journal scope
  
  

• Basic academic coherence
  
  

• Presence of argument or thesis
  
  

• Quality of writing
  
  

• Absence of plagiarism
  
  

Possible outcomes:

1. Proceed to Peer Review
   
   

2. Revise & Resubmit (R&R)
   
   

3. Reject (with constructive feedback)
   
   

Stage 2: Double-Blind Peer Review｜Timeline: 2–3 weeks

Handled by:

• Two independent peer reviewers
  
  

• Identity masked on both sides
  
  

Reviewers assess:

• Originality
  
  

• Analytical rigor
  
  

• Use of evidence
  
  

• Structure and clarity
  
  

• Suitability for publication
  
  

• Oversight of factual accuracy
  
  

• Engagement with scholarship (if applicable)
  
  

Review recommendations:

1. Accept
   
   

2. Minor Revision
   
   

3. Major Revision
   
   

4. Reject
   
   

The manuscript must receive at least one “Accept/Minor” recommendation to proceed.

Stage 3: Final Editorial Decision｜Timeline: 1–2 weeks

Handled by:

• Editor-in-Chief
  
  

• Managing Editor
  
  

Tasks:

• Evaluate reviewer comments
  
  

• Ensure revisions are completed
  
  

• Verify citations (Chicago/Turabian)
  
  

• Conduct final language polishing
  
  

• Approve for publication
  
  

Final decision categories:

• Accepted for Issue
  
  

• Accepted with Minor Edits
  
  

• Declined (with feedback)
  
  

Stage 4: Copyediting & Publication｜Timeline: 1 week

Includes:

• Style harmonization
  
  

• Footnote and bibliography checks
  
  

• Formatting into journal layout
  
  

• PDF archive creation
  
  

• Web publishing
  
  

III. Ethics & Integrity Policy

Theodore Review adheres to ethical guidelines adapted from COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and standards used by undergraduate academic journals.

1. Plagiarism

Theodore Review maintains zero tolerance for:

• Copying or paraphrasing without attribution
  
  

• Using AI-generated content without disclosure
  
  

• Passing off others’ ideas as original
  
  

• Self-plagiarism (reusing previously published work)
  
  

Any plagiarism results in:

• Immediate rejection
  
  

• Permanent ban from future submission
  
  

• Notification of the author’s institution (if necessary)
  
  

2. Data Integrity

Authors must ensure:

• All data referenced is accurate
  
  

• Statistics are correctly cited
  
  

• Historical claims are supported by evidence
  
  

• No fabrication or manipulation of evidence occurs
  
  

For qualitative essays, authors must still follow:

• Transparency
  
  

• Clear sourcing
  
  

• Honest representation of ideas
  
  

3. Author Responsibility

Authors are responsible for:

• Ensuring originality
  
  

• Obtaining permission for images, figures, or quoted materials
  
  

• Declaring if their article was submitted elsewhere
  
  

No simultaneous submissions unless explicitly agreed upon.

4. Reviewer Integrity

Reviewers must:

• Provide unbiased evaluation
  
  

• Not intentionally delay review
  
  

• Not appropriate ideas from submissions
  
  

• Maintain confidentiality
  
  

• Declare conflicts of interest
  
  

5. Editorial Integrity

Editors must:

• Not intervene for personal advantage
  
  

• Not promote friends’ submissions
  
  

• Follow the established workflow
  
  

• Maintain consistent standards
  
  

• Uphold the academic mission of the journal
  
  

6. Fairness and Transparency

Theodore Review guarantees:

• Equal opportunity for all authors
  
  

• Transparent editorial decisions
  
  

• Constructive feedback even for rejected manuscripts
  
  

• No editorial fees
  
  

• No publication fees
  
  

• No preferential treatment
  
  

7. Withdrawal & Retraction

A published article may be withdrawn if:

• Plagiarism is discovered
  
  

• Major factual error is identified
  
  

• Ethical misconduct is reported
  
  

• Copyright violations occur
  
  

Retraction notices will be public and transparent.