Korean | English

pISSN : 1229-6309

2020 KCI Impact Factor : 0.33
Home > Author > Editorial Policy

Editorial Policy

Research & Publication Ethics

Chapter 5, Regulations for Research Ethics in Japan

1. General rules
Article 1 (Purpose)

The research ethics regulations of the Japan Institute of Chung-Ang University are intended to apply the ethics regulations and regulations to researchers, editors and judges in the course of publishing the journal fififififi.

Article 2 (Composition of the Ethics Committee)

fi In order to achieve the purpose of this research ethics regulation, an ethics committee is established and operated.

fi The ethics committee shall consist of 10 members, including the director.

fi The term of office of the Ethics Committee Chairman and the members shall be two years.

Article 3 (Operation of the Ethics Committee)

fi The Ethics Committee shall deliberate on whether the members filed with the Ethics Committee violate the ethics regulations and may establish necessary rules.

fi The ethics committee shall deliberate and pass a resolution within 60 days from the date of receipt of a complaint, and the deliberation procedures of other committees of this laboratory shall apply mutatis mutandis to the deliberation procedures.

fi Discipline types and public announcements, such as expulsion, suspension of qualification, public apology, etc., shall be determined by the Ethics Committee.

Article 4 (Applications of Violation of the Ethics Charter)

fi In order to file a complaint with the Ethics Committee, at least a majority of the steering committee must be signed.

fi Executives and members who have been sued for violation of research ethics regulations shall cooperate with the investigation conducted by the ethics committee of the institute.

Article 5 (Executive opportunities and confidentiality)

fi A person who has been filed with the Ethics Committee for violating research ethics regulations shall not be deemed to have violated the ethics charter until it is confirmed.

fi Those who are filed with the ethics committee for violating research ethics regulations should be given ample opportunity to explain themselves.

fi An ethics committee member shall not disclose the identity of a person to the outside until a decision is made.

Article 6 (Amendments to the ethics committee operation regulations)

The revised regulations for the operation of the Ethics Committee shall be in accordance with the procedures for revising the regulations of the Research Institute.


2. Attachment


The operation regulations of this Ethics Committee shall take effect on May 1, 2007 through a resolution after deliberation by the Steering Committee.


3. Plagiarism Regulations

Article 1 (Definition)

The Institute defines the arbitrary use of other people's intellectual property as plagiarism, even if intentionally or unintentionally, without clarifying the source.

Article 2 (Type)

The Institute defines the following two forms as representative acts of plagiarism:

fi In case the original author's idea, logic, unique terms, data, and analysis system are used arbitrarily without disclosing the source.

fi In the case of transferring a considerable number of phrases and ideas from other people's writings or papers to the original text without quotation marks, the source is revealed.


Article 3 (The subject of examination)

The editorial committee of Chung-Ang University's Japan Research Institute is in charge of determining whether to plagiarize a paper that has already been published in the "Japan Study" or was suspected of plagiarism during the examination.

Article 4 (sanctions)

According to the severity of the plagiarism, the following sanctions shall be imposed on the author whose thesis has been identified as plagiarism:

fi No more than 5 years of research on Japan

fi Delete the paper from the cyber publication 'Japan Research'

fi Disclosure of plagiarism in the first 'Japan Study' published after the website and plagiarism were confirmed

fi Notification of plagiarism to the affiliated agency of a person who participated in the plagiarism


4. Guidelines for the materialization of research ethics regulations


1. "Fake" means the act of falsely producing data, research results, etc. that do not exist.


2. "Modulation" means the act of artificially manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, etc. or by arbitrarily modifying or deleting data, changing or omitting research contents or results, so that research contents do not conform to the truth. In this context, <distortion> is an act of inappropriate research that deliberately exaggerates or reduces some of the research data for personal gain rather than for academic development, resulting in an unfaithful conclusion.

Even if the research data are accurate, deliberately distorting the research results for the benefit of the individual researchers constitutes an inappropriate behavior.


3. The term "plagiarism" means the act of stealing ideas, research contents, results, etc. of others without due approval or citation.

1) If all or part of another person's research data is used without disclosing the exact source, or if it is used in a different form, it is an act of research cheating. This is also true if the language used is different.

2) If all or some of the previously published or published research results are published or published as if they were based on their own research concepts without quotation marks, this is a research cheating act. This is also true if the language, sentence, and expression of the use.

3) When preparing a research plan, the results or sentences already published are extracted and used without quotation marks, which correspond to research cheating.

4) Normally, two or more sentences are extracted and used equally without quotation marks in other people's papers, and they are recognized as research plagiarism. This is also true if the language used is different.

5) When publishing in a paper or book, an excerpt from a study already published by another person should also be cited using appropriate quotation marks. However, there may be exceptions depending on the academic journal.

6) If other people's published research results are already published in textbooks or publicly published data files and are used as general knowledge, they are not subject to plagiarism even if they are used in research papers or books without quotation marks.


4. "Unfairly marked" refers to the act of granting a person who has made a humanistic or academic contribution or contribution to the research contents or results to a person who does not qualify as a paper author without justifiable reasons, or to show or honor the person who does not contribute.

1) The term (justification) co-author or co-presenter means joint researchers, research assistants, and persons who have contributed to discussing important research information and reaching conclusions during research.

2) The scope of inclusion of co-authors is a significant contributor to the planning, conceptual establishment, performance, analysis of results, and the preparation of research results.

3) If it is listed as a co-author or presenter, the author or presenter shall be able to explain his/her role in the research results.

4) If a co-author or presenter includes a person who has never contributed to planning, performing, establishing concepts, analyzing results, and writing research results, or not contributing to other people's publications or papers, it is considered appropriate.

5. "Double publication" is defined in the light of the following specific cases:

1) If the researcher's own identical research results are published in the same language or in another language without quotation marks, it may be inappropriate to conduct research through double publication. In addition, the same study data and most sentences are the same can also be double-published. Double publication is usually only applicable for a thesis, except for a dissertation.

2) Collecting and publishing research findings published in a paper is not a double publication. However, in this case, the results already published must be faithfully quoted.

3) An easy-to-use publication of the contents published in academic journals and cultural magazines does not constitute a double publication.

In many academic journals, papers in short form (letters, brief communication, etc.) are published. This is not a double publication if you publish an additional long paper after publishing a short paper, add research data, add interpretation, or add detailed research process information.

5) If the original paper is cited when publishing the same study results to other readers in different languages, it is not considered a double publication. The use of the same salmon is not considered a double publication if the reader is completely different.

6) If a part of a published paper or book is selected and edited by another author with the approval of the original author and published in the form of an anthology or a special issue of an academic journal, it is not considered a double publication.

7) If a researcher registers a research result as an intellectual property through Chung-Ang University, it is independent of the dual publication.

5. Ethics regulations of editorial staff for research ethics enhancement activities

1. The editorial writer shall take full responsibility for determining whether to publish the contributed paper and respect the author's personality and independence as a scholar.

2. The editorial staff should treat papers submitted for the publication of the Japanese research journal "Japan Research" at Chung-Ang University's Japan Research Institute fairly based on the quality of the paper and the regulations of publication regardless of the author's gender, age, or institution.

3. The editorial staff shall request the evaluation of the submitted paper to the judges with professional knowledge of the field and fair judgment ability. When requesting an examination, efforts shall be made to ensure that an objective evaluation is made as far as possible by avoiding judges who are excessively close to the author or are excessively hostile. Provided, That where the evaluation of the same paper differs significantly among the judges, he/she may seek advice from a third-party expert in the relevant field.
4. The editorial writer shall not disclose the contents of the paper to anyone other than the reviewer until the publication of the submitted paper is decided.
6. Ethics regulations of judges for research ethics reinforcement activities

  1. The judges shall faithfully evaluate the papers requested by the editorial committee of the academic journal within the period prescribed by the review regulations and notify the editorial committee of the results of the evaluation. If it is deemed that you are not qualified to evaluate the content of the paper, notify the editorial committee without delay.

2. The judges shall evaluate the paper fairly on an objective basis, regardless of personal academic beliefs or personal relationships with the author. The paper shall not be dropped without sufficient evidence, nor shall it be assessed without proper reading of the paper subject to examination because it conflicts with the reviewer's own view or interpretation.


3. The judges shall respect the personality and independence of the author as a professional intellectual. An evaluation opinion paper should reveal one's judgment on the paper, but explain in detail the reasons why it is deemed necessary to supplement it. Use polite and soft expressions where possible, and refrain from disparaging or insulting the author.


4. The judges shall keep a secret about the papers subject to examination. It is also undesirable to show the paper to others or discuss the content of the paper with others unless specifically seeking advice for the evaluation of the paper. Furthermore, the content of the paper should not be quoted without the author's consent before the journal in which it is published.


5. The contributor and the assessor belonging to the same institution shall be excluded from the panel.

7. Procedures for handling suspicions of research irregularities and follow-up measures


1. Principles of verification of research irregularities

1) The ethics committee is responsible for proving whether the irregularities are true or not. However, if the investigator intentionally damages or refuses to submit the data requested by the investigation committee, the investigator shall be responsible for proving the truth of the contents deemed to be included in the research data.

2) The Ethics Committee shall ensure equal rights and opportunities for informants and investigators to state their opinions, raise objections, and defend themselves, and inform them of the relevant procedures in advance.

3) The director of the Japan Research Institute at Chung-Ang University shall endeavor to ensure that the Ethics Committee maintains independence and fairness without undue pressure or interference.


2. Procedure for verifying integrity of research irregularities

1) Verification procedures for irregularities should be carried out in preliminary investigation, main investigation, and judgment.

2) In addition to the verification procedure, investigations can be carried out by including additional procedures deemed necessary.


3. Disclosure of records and information of research fraud investigations

The Ethics Committee responsible for the investigation shall keep all records of the investigation process in the form of voice, video, or documentation for at least five years.


4. Reporting the results of a research fraud investigation

1) Details of information

2) Fraud subject to investigation

3) Whether or not this investigation is conducted and grounds for judgment (only in case of preliminary investigation)

4) Relevant evidence and witnesses


5. Post-management of research irregularities investigation results

Follow-up management is carried out in accordance with the regulations of the research ethics regulations of Chung-Ang University 'Japan Research'.

1) Confidential protection for those subject to investigation
The ethics committee shall not disclose the identity of the suspect to the outside until a final disciplinary decision is made by the editorial committee for violation of ethics regulations.

2) Procedures and details of disciplinary action
Where there is a recommendation for disciplinary action by the Ethics Committee, the director shall convene an editorial committee to determine whether to discipline and the details of disciplinary action. A contributor to a paper determined to have violated ethics regulations may be punished, such as warning and making (see article 4) and may notify the research and fraudulent actor's agency of the action.

fi The Research Ethics Information Center (http://www.cre.or.kr) is introduced on its website to promote research ethics.


6. When confirming the publication of the paper, the following confirmation of research ethics compliance statement shall be prepared, and if the publisher does not submit the written pledge, the paper shall be rejected.


7. During the paper review request period, the paper similarity test is conducted, and the editorial committee reviews the test results and reflects the similarity score in deciding whether to publish the paper.