Korean | English

pISSN : 1738-0057 / eISSN : 2671-8332

2020 KCI Impact Factor : 3.22
Home > Author > Editorial Policy

Editorial Policy

Research & Publication Ethics

1. (Purpose) The purpose of this Regulation is to provide for the ethics regulations, following the publication of the academic journal, the Journal of Lifelong Learning Societyissued by the Institute of Distance Education of the Korea National Open University.

2. (Ethical Obligations of Authors) Authors of the Journal should comply with the following ethical obligations.

1) Authors should be truthful in inventing research ideas, carrying out the research, obtaining the research results, etc.

2) Authors should ensure not to commit any violation of the research ethics.

3) Authors should respect the intellectual property rights of others and not infringe such rights.

4) Authors should conduct conscientious research and contribute to the development of society.


3. (Significance and Type of Research Misconducts) In this Journal, 'research misconducts' such as plagiarism, unfair authorship, forgery, falsification, duplicate publication, and other misconduct should be considered as violations of research ethics, where each behavior means the following:

1) The term 'Plagiarism' refers to the arbitrary use of the intellectual property of others without indicating the source. The type of plagiarism includes cases using 'novel research ideas,' 'phrases of research deliverables and writings,' 'manufactured data collection tools,' 'analyzed data,' 'unique research results,' etc. of the original author of the works released or published, without indicating the sources in the academic citation method.

2) The term 'unfair authorship' refers to cases where the authors inappropriately considering the level of contribution to the process of writing a paper. In particular, the Journal regulates the indication of authors for papers that revised dissertations as follows:

① If a submitted paper is a revised thesis of a dissertation, such acknowledgements should be indicated in the title and the concerned dissertation should be specified in the references.

② If two or more authors are indicated, the author of the dissertation should the first author and the other authors should be specified as a corresponding author or a co-author: Provided, That a letter of explanation describing the parts contributed by each author should be attached.

3) The term 'Forgery' refers to the act of falsely creating a research process or result without being based on the facts.

4) The term 'Falsification' refers to cases of artificially manipulating or altering the research conducting method, research data results, etc. in the research process.

5) The term 'Duplicate publication' refers to cases of a paper with the same contents in to or more journals.

6) The term 'other misconduct' refers to actions that seriously deviate from the generally accepted scope of research ethics other than the research misconducts defined above.


4. (Establishment of Research Ethics Committee) A research ethics committee should be established within the Board of the Journal to deliberate on matters related to research ethics.


5. (Composition and Operation of Research Ethics Committee)

1) The Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Committee) should be composed of no more than five members including the chairperson of the Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Chairperson) and Committee Members (hereinafter referred to as the Member).

2) The Chairperson should be appointed by the editor-in-chief of the Journal.

3) Members should be appointed by the Chairperson, and the term of office of the Members should be three years and may be reappointed.

4) The Committee should be called by the Chairperson at the request of the editor-in-chief or if the Chairperson deems it necessary.

5) Members should maintain all matters relevant to the deliberations in confidence and the meeting should be held in a non-disclosed setting.

6) The Committee should be formulated with the attendance of a majority of the registered members, and decided by decisions the concurrent votes of a majority of the members present: Provided, That, the power of attorney should be recognized as attendance at the formulation of the Committee, but voting rights should not be granted.


6. (Reporting and Judgment of Violation of Research Ethics)

1) Reports on violations of research ethics should be submitted to the Chairperson, editor-in-chief, or Board members by disclosing the identity and contact information of the informant and attaching relevant data in writing, e-mail or other possible means.

2) Matters concerning the identity of the informant should not subject to information disclosure, and measures should be taken to ensure that the informant is not disadvantaged for reporting. The informant may request the Committee to disclose information on the investigation procedure and schedule following the report of misconduct, and the Committee should faithfully respond to such request: Provided, That, the informant who reported in spite of knowing or might have known that the content of the report is false and such informant should not subject to protection.

3) The Board members should be obligated to review research ethics violations of the submitted papers at all times, and should report to the Committee in consultation with the editor-in-chief in case they recognized any violation of the research ethics.

4) When a report of an ethics violation is received, the Chairperson should convene the Committee within 3 weeks and deliberate and make a decision within 50 days.

5) Members who are involved in the paper subject to the deliberation of the Committee may not participate in the deliberation of the concerned paper.

6) The Chairperson may demand the person subject to deliberation to submit or report data, and may request an opinion on the violation of research ethics from an external expert.


7. (Opportunity of Defense and Non-disclosed Deliberation)

1) The committee should inform the person subject to deliberation of the procedure of the Committee and committee's procedure and give an opportunity to defend himself/herself.

2) The identity and deliberation matters of the person subject to deliberation should not be disclosed externally until the final decision of the Committee is made.

8. (Sanctions for Violation of Research EthicsDepending on the severity of the case, the Committee should take measures such as 'written warning,' 'prohibition of submission for 3 to 5 years,' 'cancellation of publication and removal from the list of published papers,' 'notification to the person's affiliation and the Korea Research Foundation,' etc. and the results should be announced on the website of the Journal.


9. (Re-deliberation) If the person subject to deliberation determined for violating research ethics raises an objection against the decision of the Committee, the Committee should conduct a re-deliberation and notify the result.


10. (IRB Approval) Research involving human subjects among the submitted papers should be approved or exempted from deliberation by the IRB (Institutional Review Board).


11. (Confirmation of Compliance with Research Ethics RegulationsIn the Journal, the following documents should be submitted mandatorily to check the compliance of the research ethics regulations of the authors.

1) When applying for a paper publication in the Journal, the author should submit a Commitment for compliance with the research ethics regulations to the Board.

2) When applying for a paper publication in the Journal, the author should submit the results of plagiarism check for preventing plagiarism to the Board, and should be deliberated by the Committee in case the plagiarism check result of the submitted paper exceeds the scope generally allowed.


12. (Ethics Regulations for Editors)

1) The Board should treat submitted papers in a fair manner based solely on the quality of the paper and submission rules, regardless of any submitted manuscript fairly as well as the gender, age and affiliation of the author.

2) Board members should request the evaluation of the submitted papers to reviewers with expertise in the concerned field and with fair judgment ability.

3) Board members should not disclose any matters about the author or the contents of the paper to any person other than the reviewers until publication of the submitted paper is determined.


13. (Ethics Regulations for Reviewers)

1) The reviewers of the papers submitted to the Journal should objectively and fairly evaluate the papers requested for review in accordance with the paper review criteria of the Regulation on Publication of Journal, regardless of his/her academic beliefs or personal relationship with the author.

2) The reviewers should respect the personality and independence of the author as a professional intellectual. In the review opinion, the reviewer should clarify his/her decision on the paper and explain the reasons in as much detail as possible for any part considered to require supplementation, preferably using polite and gentle expressions.

3) The reviewers should maintain the papers subject to review in confidence. In addition, the contents of the paper should not be cited without the consent of the author before the issuance of the Journal publishing the paper.