Journal of Communication Design 2022 KCI Impact Factor : 0.91

Korean | English

pISSN : 1976-1562
Home > Author > Editorial Policy

Editorial Policy

Research & Publication Ethics

Korea Communication Design Association Communication Design Association

[Research Ethics Regulations]

Chapter 1 General Rules

Article 1 (Purpose) The Research Ethics Regulations of the Korea Communications Design Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Academic Society") shall prescribe matters necessary to prevent research misconduct by researchers who promote, manage, or conduct research-related projects.

Article 2 (Applicable) The research ethics provisions shall apply to all persons related to research and development and activities of projects related to academic societies.

Article 3 (Scope of Coverage) Except as otherwise expressly provided for in other Acts and subordinate statutes, the provisions shall apply where special provisions under other Acts and subordinate statutes restrict this research ethics regulation. 

Chapter 2 Research Ethics Regulations

Article 4 (Scope of Research Fraud) Research Fraud (hereinafter referred to as "Fraudulent Acts") means forgery, tampering, plagiarism, double publication, etc. conducted in the course of performing research and development tasks, reporting and presentation of research and development results:

1 The term "forgery" (fabrication) means the act of falsely producing data, research results, etc. that do not exist. 

2 The term "modulation" means the act of distorting research contents or results by artificially manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, etc. or arbitrarily changing or deleting data or research results.

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

4 The term "disclosure of an unjust paper author" means the act of granting a person who has made an academic and technical contribution or contribution to a research, or qualification of a paper author on the grounds of appreciation or honorable treatment.

5 Duplicate publication shall not engage in the act of publishing or publishing works identical to or substantially similar to the results of his/her previous research and using them as research results, achievements, etc.

Article 5 (Ethics of Researchers) A researcher shall have the following attitudes:

1. Researchers should be honest in their research. Honesty here refers to honesty in the overall research process, such as drawing ideas, designing experiments, analyzing results, supporting research funds, publishing research results, and fair compensation for research participants.

2. In research, researchers should consider forgery, tampering, plagiarism, unfair marking of the author of the paper, and duplicate publication as serious crimes and do their best to prevent such irregularities from occurring.

3. A researcher shall take an open attitude for the development of learning and technology to the extent that his/her research secrets are protected, and shall actively provide research-related results, etc. to the extent permitted by intellectual property rights or research-related restrictions.

4. Authors listed in published research results, such as papers, shall be able to fulfill their responsibilities by familiarizing themselves with the contents, and shall not grant author authority to persons who have not contributed.

5 When the relevant researchers indicate a person who has contributed to the calculation of research results as an author or co-author, they shall determine through consultation between participants and ensure that the achievements of research are reasonably distributed.

Article 6 (Requirement to be presented as an author) The requirements to be the author of the paper are as follows.

1. To become an author, you must meet all four criteria below.

① To obtain, analyze, or analyze the concept or design of a study or research data,

A man of considerable contribution.

② Drafting or critically revising important academic content.

a person who has committed a crime

③ The person who finally approved the version to be published.

④ A person who agrees to be responsible for all aspects of the study so that questions relating to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the study are properly investigated and addressed.

2. Authors should be responsible for their research and should be aware of which co-author is responsible for which part of the research

- In addition, the author must be confident of the research integrity of the co-authors' contributions

3. All researchers recorded as authors must meet the above four criteria, and all researchers who meet the above four criteria must be specified as authors

- This criterion is intended to grant authors only to researchers who are entitled to be recognized as authors and who are responsible for their research, not deprive co-researchers of opportunities to meet criteria No. 2 and No. 1

- Therefore, all researchers who meet the criteria (1) must have an opportunity to participate in the preparation, review, and final approval of the manuscript.

4. Researchers are responsible for identifying people who meet the author's standards.

- Ideally, when planning a study for the first time, when making appropriate modifications as the research progresses, it is desirable to establish that the author is authorized according to the above criteria.

- In addition, the order of authors must be determined according to the joint decision of all authors.

5. Criteria for corresponding author

- Communicator is primarily responsible for communicating with academic journals submitted during the course of manuscript's publication, peer review, and publication.

- Usually responsible for checking academic journal administrative requirements (*)

* Example: Provide detailed information about the authors, approval of the Ethics Committee, documentation of clinical trial registration, conflict of interest forms and statements, etc.

- Communicator must be able to contact the editor in a timely manner throughout the thesis presentation and expert review process

- In addition, after the paper is published, it should respond to criticism of the paper and cooperate when additional materials are requested by the academic journal due to questions about the paper.

6. Non-author contributors

- Contributors who are not authors should not be listed as authors who do not meet all four conditions of authorship, but their contributions should be recognized.

Contribution activities not listed as authors (examples): acquisition of research funds, general supervision of research groups, general administrative support, manuscript preparation assistance, technical manuscript correction, language correction, final manuscript correction, etc.

- Researchers who do not meet the author requirements may be recorded as contributors to the audit, or under the same name as investigators or participating investigators

Contributors' contributions should be detailed, such as advisors, critically reviewing the study proposal, collecting data, etc.

7. Examples of substantive proof criteria for co-author qualifications for creative contributions may be qualified as co-author if the following examples are met with the consent of researchers:

- Have you presented any original ideas (concepts) for the study?

- Do you have a specific design for the study?

- Did he/she make a recognizable contribution as an author by understanding the research plan and obtaining data accordingly (experiments, measurements, interviews, surveys, observations, etc.) and practically analyzing and interpreting it?

- Have you organized the data you produced, drafted a paper describing how the data was produced, and its conclusions and interpretations? Is this also included in the final version of the paper?

- Have you made any significant intellectual contributions (comments, revisions, and supplements) to the draft of the contribution paper?

Article 7 (Unfair Author Indication) The types of unjust Author Indication for research papers are as follows.

1. A person marked as an author without significant intellectual contribution related to the research paper.

- Broadly referred to as Honorary Authorship. These include Coercive Authorship, Guest Authors, Gift Authors, Honorary Authors, Mutual Support Authors, and Duplicated Authors, although they have not contributed significantly to the research project.

2. Those who have important intellectual contributions related to research papers but are missing from the author list

- Broadly referred to as Ghost authorship. In particular severe cases of ghost authorship, this is referred to as "denial of authorship". Rejection of authorship is a form of "plagiarism" and constitutes research misconduct.

Article 8 (Ethics of editorial members) An editorial member shall have the following attitudes:

1. An editorial member shall be responsible for determining whether to publish a submitted paper, and shall respect the author's personality and independence as a scholar.

2. Editorial members shall treat papers submitted for publication of academic journals fairly solely based on the qualitative level of the paper and the regulations for publication, regardless of the author's gender, age, or affiliation, as well as any prejudice or personal acquaintance.

3. The editorial member shall request the evaluation of the submitted paper to a judge with expertise and fair judgment ability in the relevant field so that objective examination can be conducted.

Article 9 (Ethics of the Review Committee) The examiner shall have the following attitudes:

1. The examiner shall faithfully evaluate the paper requested by the editorial committee (committee) of the academic journal and notify the editorial committee (committee) of the results of the evaluation within the period prescribed by the examination regulations. If it is deemed that he/she is not the right person to evaluate the contents of the paper, he/she shall notify the editorial committee (the council) of the fact without delay.

2. The judges shall evaluate the paper fairly by objective standards, regardless of personal academic beliefs or personal friendship with the author.