Editorial Governance

ISVD (Institute for Social Vision Design, hereinafter "we" or "the Institute") positions its structural analysis of social issues as public-interest academic activity. To ensure the continued trustworthiness of our content, this page sets out the principles of our editorial governance.

Our columns, practical guides, and research are edited according to the following principles.

1.1 Prioritizing Structural Analysis

Rather than merely explaining individual phenomena, we aim to render visible the structural mechanisms behind them. The three-section format — "What Is Happening," "Background and Context," "Reading the Structure" — is a formal safeguard for this priority.

1.2 Rigorous Fact-Checking

Specific numbers, statistics, and historical facts appearing in our content are, as a rule, grounded in primary sources (government statistics, academic papers, public sector publications). Sources are cited inline via <StatRef> / <Ref> / <Citation> components, and URL reachability is verified before publication.

1.3 Explanation of Technical Terms

Industry terms, academic terms, and abbreviations are accompanied by an explanation at first occurrence. Comprehensibility for readers without specialized knowledge is an editorial requirement.

1.4 Meaning Through Function, Not Metaphor

We prioritize describing "the actual function and structure of A" over metaphorical statements like "A is like B." Metaphor is used only as a supplementary aid.

Each article passes through the following editorial process before publication.

1. Drafting — Assigned author writes the initial draft
2. Fact-checking — Verifies factual claims, statistics, and citations in the text
3. Content validation — Checks structural integrity, technical terms, diagrams, and source coverage
4. DA Review (Devil's Advocate Review) — Evaluates the article across 10 MECE categories (Functionality, Accessibility, Performance, SEO, Security, Internationalization, Responsiveness, UX detail, Legal, Operations)
5. Revision loop — Revises based on the DA Review until reaching at least A- grade
6. Publication — Status changed to published and distributed

The verification log for each step is retained internally and used as input for correction and retraction decisions.

Currently, editorial responsibility lies with Naoya Yokota, Representative Director, as the sole member of the editorial board. We plan to expand the board to include external experts, practitioners, and researchers.

When the board is expanded, this page will list the members' names, areas of expertise, and terms.

Our content has not, as of now, been subject to external peer review. For articles planned for parallel submission to peer-reviewed journals, this will be noted at the beginning of the article.

A list of peer-reviewed articles will be added to this page as they become available.

When any of the following apply to an article, this is disclosed at the beginning or end of the article body.

• The article mentions a project or organization that has provided financial support to the Institute
• The author has a personal relationship with the organization or person mentioned
• The article mentions products or services for which the Institute participates in an affiliate program (current: Amazon Associates, with tag=isvd-22 appended to book links in ISVD columns and practical guides)

If conflicts of interest may influence the article's claims, this is explicitly discussed within the article itself.

If a significant error is discovered after publication, we follow the procedures below.

6.1 Minor Corrections

Typos, broken URLs, replaced figures, and similar minor changes are made silently in the text (recorded in the editorial log).

6.2 Factual Corrections

For errors in numbers, statistics, or citations, or for significant interpretive errors, we:

• Add a "Correction History" section at the end of the article, showing both the pre-correction and post-correction content
• Update the "Last Updated" date (separate from the publication date)
• For articles with a registered DOI, register a new version on Zenodo (keeping the previous version)

6.3 Retraction

Articles found to contain significant factual errors or ethical issues are retracted.

• Article body is replaced with a retraction notice (reason, history, date)
• The URL is preserved (not 404'd)
• For articles with a registered DOI, the status is changed to "retracted" on Zenodo

The history of corrections and retractions will be published on this page (not yet published; to be established alongside the expansion of the editorial board).

Our content is open to academic citation regardless of country or region. We welcome citation reports and research feedback from researchers and students outside Japan under this governance framework.

However, formal collaboration with international academic communities (joint research, peer review exchange, etc.) will be developed incrementally after the expansion of the editorial board.

For questions or pointers regarding editorial governance, please contact us via the contact form with the subject line "Comment on editorial governance."