Korean | English

pISSN : 1229-3946

2020 KCI Impact Factor : 0.68
Home > Author > Editorial Policy

Editorial Policy

Research & Publication Ethics

The members of this society shall faithfully fulfill their moral and social obligations to be observed as academic researchers. And he is proud of his research that can serve the academic purpose of truth exploration and contribute to the happiness of mankind and the progress of society.

 

Deep awareness of the roles and responsibilities for the society members in good faith, honor and dignity to hone their act his knowledge, ability and character and at the same time, humanity and with nature.Try to co-exist. He/she shall be able to set an example as a leader who acts honestly, fairly, and participates in the construction of a sound and living society in compliance with all statutes.

In order to perform these goals, the standards of conduct as a member shall be prescribed to enhance his/her status as an expert and to play a role as a trusted researcher.

 

Article 1 (Duties of Members) The members of the plenary session shall comply with the norms as researchers, promote the development of learning and society through academic research, and faithfully fulfill their responsibilities as researchers.

 

Article 2 (The establishment of the Committee) An academic research ethics committee shall be established within the plenary session to examine the compliance with the norms of the members of the plenary session and their duties of sincerity.

 

Article 3 (Composition of the Committee) The Committee shall have the following officials:

1. Chairperson: 1 person

2. Member: not more than 10 persons

3. Executive secretary: 1 person

 

Article 4 (Elections of Members) Members of the Committee shall be commissioned from among members of the relevant field with the recommendation of the Chairperson and approval of the board of directors. The Vice-Chairperson will be the chairperson.

 

Article 5 (Duties of the Committee) The Committee shall examine the members' violations of academic research ethics and report the results of their treatment to the Board of Directors.

 

Article 6 (Ethical Violation Cases) The following cases shall be referred to in the examination by the Committee:

1) Items related to dignity as a member

(1) In the event of a judicial sanction in violation of the laws or regulations required by the general public;

(2) Where he/she causes controversy in violation of his/her ethics as a researcher, such as unfair personnel intervention or illegal execution of research funds;

(3) Judgment related to the dignity of a member shall be consistent with the request of the public and academia, but shall not be determined on an unjust premise, such as public intervention.

2) Items related to the morality of research results

(1) If the results of a new study are falsified, tampered with or plagiarized by stealing the results of one's own or another;

(2) Where an existing study is intentionally disparaged or concealed in order to reveal the results of one's own research;

(3) Where it is determined that there are serious moral deficiencies in the initiation, process and outcome of other studies;

(4) Determining the morality of research results is based on the integrity, efficiency, and objectivity of the research progress and results.

 

Article 7 (Review Procedure) The examination by the Committee shall be in accordance with the following procedures:

1) The commencement of examination of the Committee shall be made at the request of the Committee or the Chairperson. Upon receipt of a request for examination, the Chairperson shall convene the Committee immediately.

2) The Committee shall determine the procedures for examination of the agenda items through discussion on the proposed agenda, such as whether to participate in the examination or external examiners, but exclude members who may affect the progress of the examination.

3) The Committee shall determine whether to violate research ethics after thorough examination of the research results by researchers. The members of this society shall faithfully fulfill their moral and social obligations to be observed as academic researchers. And he is proud of his research that can serve the academic purpose of truth exploration and contribute to the happiness of mankind and the progress of society.

 

Deep awareness of the roles and responsibilities for the society members in good faith, honor and dignity to hone their act his knowledge, ability and character and at the same time, humanity and with nature.Try to co-exist. He/she shall be able to set an example as a leader who acts honestly, fairly, and participates in the construction of a sound and living society in compliance with all statutes.

In order to perform these goals, the standards of conduct as a member shall be prescribed to enhance his/her status as an expert and to play a role as a trusted researcher.

 

Article 1 (Duties of Members) The members of the plenary session shall comply with the norms as researchers, promote the development of learning and society through academic research, and faithfully fulfill their responsibilities as researchers.

 

Article 2 (The establishment of the Committee) An academic research ethics committee shall be established within the plenary session to examine the compliance with the norms of the members of the plenary session and their duties of sincerity.

 

Article 3 (Composition of the Committee) The Committee shall have the following officials:

1. Chairperson: 1 person

2. Member: not more than 10 persons

3. Executive secretary: 1 person

 

Article 4 (Elections of Members) Members of the Committee shall be commissioned from among members of the relevant field with the recommendation of the Chairperson and approval of the board of directors. The Vice-Chairperson will be the chairperson.

 

Article 5 (Duties of the Committee) The Committee shall examine the members' violations of academic research ethics and report the results of their treatment to the Board of Directors.

 

Article 6 (Ethical Violation Cases) The following cases shall be referred to in the examination by the Committee:

1) Items related to dignity as a member

(1) In the event of a judicial sanction in violation of the laws or regulations required by the general public;

(2) Where he/she causes controversy in violation of his/her ethics as a researcher, such as unfair personnel intervention or illegal execution of research funds;

(3) Judgment related to the dignity of a member shall be consistent with the request of the public and academia, but shall not be determined on an unjust premise, such as public intervention.

2) Items related to the morality of research results

(1) If the results of a new study are falsified, tampered with or plagiarized by stealing the results of one's own or another;

(2) Where an existing study is intentionally disparaged or concealed in order to reveal the results of one's own research;

(3) Other issues of conflict of interest that may be judged to be serious moral defects in the initiation, process, and outcome of the study, or may undermine objectivity, reliability, and fairness.

(4) Determining the morality of research results is based on the integrity, efficiency, objectivity, and  conflict of interest of the research progress and results.

 

Article 7 (Review Procedure) The examination by the Committee shall be in accordance with the following procedures:

1) The commencement of examination of the Committee shall be made at the request of the Committee or the Chairperson. Upon receipt of a request for examination, the Chairperson shall convene the Committee immediately.

2) The Committee shall determine the procedures for examination of the agenda items through discussion on the proposed agenda, such as whether to participate in the examination or external examiners, but exclude members who may affect the progress of the examination.

3) The Committee shall determine whether to violate research ethics after thorough examination of the research results by researchers. The Committee may, if necessary, interview and investigate the relevant researchers, informants, judges, etc. of the thesis on which the problem has been raised.

4) The Chairperson shall determine the processing of the agenda with the attendance of a majority of the members and the consent of a majority of the members present, and shall review the granting of opportunities for explanation of the results through consultation with the relevant researcher.

5) His/her calling is made through a closed-door meeting of the Examination Committee. The Chairperson shall fully explain the progress of the examination to the relevant researcher and notify him/her to attend the meeting by preparing the requested data for his/her calling.

6) The Chairperson of the Examination Committee shall make a final decision on whether to reverse the decision of the Examination Committee after the name of the relevant researcher and report it to the Board of Directors. The decision on whether to reverse or not shall be made with the attendance of a majority of the members and the consent of a majority of the members present.

7) The Examiner shall not disclose the identity, progress, etc. of the relevant member to the outside world.

 

Article 8 (Report of the results of the examination) The Committee shall immediately report the results of the examination to the board of directors. The following matters shall be included in the report:

1) Contents of appointment for examination

2) Cheating that is subject to examination

3) List of judges and review procedures

4) Evidence related to the examination decision

5) Calling and processing procedures for the members subject to examination

 

Article 9 (Punishment) The Committee shall determine the type of disciplinary action after completing the examination and interview investigation. The types of disciplinary action include the following and may be disposed of in duplicate:

1) expulsion

2) Cancellation of the paper's authority and prohibition of citation

3) Public apology at the conference

4) Suspension of qualification as a member

 

Article 10 (Follow-up measures) The Board of Directors shall review the report of the Examination Committee and take the following measures:

1) The Chairperson shall immediately implement the decision of the Examination Committee according to the decision of the board of directors.

2) If the results of the review determine that there is a problem with rationality and validity, the board of directors may request the review committee to reconsider or supplement the report. The Board's request is made only with documents stating specific reasons.

 

Article 11 (Administrative Affairs)

1) Matters not specified in this Regulation shall be implemented according to the decision of the Committee.

2) Modification of ethical regulations shall be implemented in accordance with the revision procedure of the regulations of this society.

3) The executive secretary shall prepare the contents of the meeting of the Committee in writing and report it to the board of directors.

4) The Society shall provide financial support necessary for the smooth operation of the Committee.

 

Article 12 (Ethical Regulations) Members of this Society shall observe the following ethical regulations:

1) Ethical regulations to be followed by the author

(1) Plagiarism

The author does not present any part of his research or arguments in his thesis or writings as if they were his findings or claims. Although it may be possible to refer to other people's findings several times, presenting some of them as if they were their own findings or claims is plagiarism.

(2) Publishing achievements

A. The author is responsible only for the research he has actually done or contributed to, and is also recognized as an achievement.

B. The order of authors (reversals) or authors of articles or other publication achievements shall be accurately reflected according to their contribution to the research, regardless of their relative status. Simply because one is in a position, it cannot be justified to be an author or to be recognized as a first author. On the other hand, it is also unjustifiable not to be recorded as a co-author (translator) or co-researcher even though it contributed to research or writing (translation). Small contributions to research or writing (translation) are properly appreciated in footnotes, preferences, and private affairs.

(3) Duplicate publication or publication of research works;

The author does not attempt to publish or publish his previously published research (including those scheduled to be published or under review) as if it were a new study, regardless of whether it is at home or abroad. If it is intended to publish using published research, it shall provide information on previous publications to the editors of the journal to be published and confirm whether it falls under duplicate publications or dual publications.

(4) Citation and reference marking

A. When quoting published academic data, he/she shall endeavor to accurately describe it, and shall clearly state the source unless it belongs to common sense. In the case of data obtained during the assessment of a paper or research plan or through personal contact, it may only be cited after obtaining consent from the researcher who provided the information.

B. If you quote someone else's writing or borrow (reference) other people's ideas, you must state whether they are cited or referenced in footnotes, which allow the reader to know where they are the result of prior research and where they are original ideas, arguments, or interpretations.

(5) Modification of the thesis

The authors shall endeavor to reflect the opinions of the editorial and judges as much as possible in the course of the paper's evaluation, and if they do not agree, write the reasons and grounds in detail and inform the editorial members (Council).

2) Ethical regulations to be followed by editorial members

A. Editorial members shall be fully responsible for determining whether to publish the contributed papers and shall respect the author's personality and independence as a scholar.

B. Editor-in-chief shall treat papers contributed for publication of academic journals solely based on the quality level and contribution regulations of the paper, regardless of the author's gender, age, or agency, as well as any preconceptions or personal acquaintance.

C. The editorial member shall request the evaluation of the contributed papers to the judges with professional knowledge and fair judgment in the relevant field. When requesting an examination, he/she shall endeavor to ensure that an objective evaluation is made as much as possible by avoiding judges who are too close to the author or too hostile. Provided, That where the evaluation of the same paper differs significantly among the judges, he/she may be consulted by a third-party expert in the relevant field.

D. Editorial members shall not disclose any matter about the author or the contents of the paper to anyone other than the reviewer until the publication of the contributed paper is determined.

3) Ethics rules to be followed by judges

A. The Examiner shall faithfully evaluate the paper requested by the Editorial Committee of the Journal (Council) within the period prescribed by the Examination Regulations and notify the Editorial Committee (Council) of the results of the evaluation. If it is deemed that he is not the right person to evaluate the content of the paper, the editorial member (Council) shall be notified without delay.

B. The reviewer should evaluate the paper fairly based on objective standards, regardless of personal academic beliefs or personal relationships with the author. The paper should not be eliminated without sufficient evidence, or the paper should not be eliminated because it conflicts with the reviewer's own point of view or interpretation, nor should the paper be evaluated without reading it properly.

C. The examiner shall respect the character and independence of the author as a professional intellectual. In the evaluation opinion, you should clarify your judgment on the paper, but explain in detail why you think it is necessary to supplement it. Use polite and gentle expressions as much as possible, and refrain from disparaging or insulting the author.

D. Judges shall keep confidential information about the papers subject to examination. It is also not desirable to show the paper to others or discuss the content of the paper with others unless specifically advice is sought for paper evaluation. In addition, the contents of the paper should not be cited without the author's consent before the publication of the journal in which the paper is published.

 

<Attachment>

 

Article 1 This Regulation shall enter into force on August 1, 2007.

Article 2 This amended provisions shall enter into force on August 13, 2011.

Article 3 This amended provisions shall enter into force on April 30, 2021.