본문 바로가기
  • Home

Editorial Policy


Regulations on ‘Informatization Policy’ Research Ethics

 

Amendments

2008. 06. 03

2011. 12. 01

2016. 12. 22

 

 

Chapter 1 General Provisions

 

Article 1 (Objective)

 

This set of regulations is aimed at establishing the research ethics and preventing any fraudulent act in advance so as to contribute to development of knowledge information through publication of the ‘Informatization Policy’, an academic journal featuring a collection of high-quality research papers published by the National Information Society Agency (hereinafter called NIA) of the Republic of Korea.

 

Article 2 (Application)

 

The regulations are applied to the activities of the paper contributors, editors and examiners, who are directly or indirectly related to the publication of the ‘Informatization Policy’ of NIA.

 

 

Chapter 2 Ethics for Paper Contributors

 

Article 3 (Prohibition of Plagiarism)

 

Each of the following activities is considered as plagiarism and, therefore, prohibited.

 

In general, any act of extracting and using a series of sentences as a whole from another author’s paper without specifying the source is considered as plagiarism.

 

Any act of using all or part of research data, which have been already published by others, without specifying the source or alteration of the form, is considered as plagiarism.

 

Any act of using all or part of key concept of research results, which have been already published by others, and publishing the contents as if they are the concept and results of the contributor’s own, without specifying the source, is considered as plagiarism.

 

In any case where research results already published by others are generally considered as common knowledge, using the contents in a research paper or writing work without citation is not considered as plagiarism.

 

A paper contributor is required to submit the result of plagiarism check using any open online plagiarism checker, such as ‘Copy Killer’. The Chief Editor and examiners of the contributed paper shall first review the check result and then examine whether the paper is plagiarized.

 

Article 4 (Citation and Reference)

 

An author must specify the source when citing any open academic data, unless the data fall in the category of common knowledge.

 

Any data that an author obtained through personal contact and used in his/her writing can be cited only after obtaining consent from the rightful owner of the data.

 

Article 5 (Unlawful Authorship)

 

An author is responsible and credited only for the research that he/she actually contributed.

 

Simply holding a certain position does not justify authorship, nor does any contribution to research without being listed as a co-author or co-researcher.

 

Article 6 (Prohibition of Duplicate Publication)

 

Each of the following activities is considered as duplicate publication and, therefore, prohibited.

 

Publication of an author’s same research results in the same or any other language without specifying the source is considered as duplicate publication. Any paper displaying the same research data and sentences in most part can be also considered as duplicate publication. However, if the paper is to be published as a research report or a thesis, the researcher or author is required to notify the Chief Editor in advance and specify the fact as a footnote. The paper submission process can be cancelled in any case such notification is made after the paper is submitted.

 

One cannot contribute his/her own work that had been published before (including any work scheduled for publication or under examination) as if it is a new research work. When an author wishes to contribute any work that had been already published, he/she must provide the publication information to the Editorial Committee and receive confirmation whether it is considered as duplicate publication.

 

Publishing the same research results in any different language for other readers without specifying the source is considered as duplicate publication.

 

Article 7 (Prohibition of Forgery and Falsification)

 

Each of the following activities is considered as forgery or falsification and, therefore, prohibited.

 

The term ‘forgery’ means any act of creating, recording or reporting fictitious data or false research results.

 

The term ‘falsification’ means any act of manipulating research-related materials, equipment or process, or manipulating the opinions of respondents in a survey with the purpose of changing or omitting research data or results, making the contents of the research deceitful.

 

A researcher must not forge or falsify primary and secondary data with the intention of obtaining the wanted results, which is considered as research misconduct. Causing any error in research data by mistake can be also considered as research misconduct.

 

Article 8 (Prohibition of Distortion)

 

Each of the following activities is considered as distortion and, therefore, prohibited.

 

The term ‘distortion’ means any act of exaggerating or minimizing part of the research data on purpose, making the results deceitful, which is considered as a case of research misconduct.

 

Even though the research data are accurate, any act of distorting the research results on purpose is considered as a case of research misconduct.

 

Article 9 (Revision of the Paper)

 

A contributor shall make an effort to accommodate the editors’ and examiners’ feedback through the course of paper examination and accordingly make revisions in the paper. In any case a contributor does not agree with such feedback, he/she must explain in detail the grounds and reasons in written form and submit to the Editorial Committee.

 

Article 10 (Confirmation of Copyright Infringement)

 

Confirmation of suspected copyright infringement of any research paper that had been already published in the ‘Informatization Policy’ or is under examination is a role of the Ethics Committee. Should such confirmation not reach an agreement, the case may be put to the vote and decided by the majority rule.

 

 

Chapter 3 Ethics for Editors

 

Article 11 (Responsibility)

 

An editor is responsible for all activities determining publication of a contributed paper and shall respect the contributor’s personality as a human and independence as a scholar.

 

Article 12 (Universality)

 

An editor shall treat a contributed paper for publication in the ‘Informatization Policy’ in a just and fair manner based on the quality of the paper and contribution regulations regardless of the author’s gender, age, background, prejudice or personal connection in any form whatsoever

 

Article 13 (Request for Examination)

 

An editor shall request an examiner having the professional knowledge and the ability to make fair judgement to evaluate a contributed paper.

 

An editor shall consider the contributor’s educational background and current position in office to ensure objective examination as much as possible.

 

Should there be significantly different examination results on the same paper among examiners, a third-party expert in the field can be invited for consultation.

 

 

Chapter 4 Ethics for Examiners

 

 

Article 14 (Time Compliance)

 

An examiner shall sincerely evaluate the paper that the Editorial Committee of the ‘Informatization Policy’ requested for examination within the given period of time and notify the Editorial Committee of the result.

 

If an examiner finds him/herself not qualified for examination of the contents of a paper, he/she shall notify the Editorial Committee of the ‘Informatization Policy’ without delay.

 

Article 15 (Fairness)

 

An examiner shall not reject a paper without specifying ample grounds or due to contradiction to his/her own viewpoint or interpretation; rather, he/she shall ensure fair evaluation based on a set of objective criteria.

 

Article 16 (Respect for Contributors)

 

An examiner shall respect personality and independence of the author as a professional.

 

An examiner shall make the Examination Report, describing his/her opinion regarding the paper and the detailed reason for any necessary improvement using tone and manner as respectful and soft as possible and avoiding any expression that degrades or insults the author.

 

Article 17 (Confidentiality)

 

An examiner shall abide by the confidentiality rules as specified in the Publication Regulations.

 

Unless an examiner seeks for special advice regarding examination of a paper, he/she should not share the paper or discuss its contents with another person.

 

An examiner should not cite any content of a paper before the ‘Informatization Policy’ containing the paper is published.

 

 

Chapter 5 Treatment of Research Ethics Violations

 

Article 18 (Reports and Discontinuation of Examination)

 

An informant may report any act of violation of research ethics to the Editorial Committee of the ‘Informatization Policy’ in form of a written document or electronic mail. The informant, in principle, should use his/her real name when reporting; however, in any case the informant wishes to remain anonymous, he/she must provide the title of the paper and submit the specific contents and evidences of violation in form of a written document or electronic mail.

 

If a paper that is reported as violating the research ethics regulations is in the process of examination, the examination shall be discontinued.

 

Article 19 (Ethics Committee Meetings)

 

In any case where a report is filed regarding research ethics violation of the ‘Informatization Policy’, the Chief Editor must call a meeting of the Ethics Committee.

 

The Ethics Committee is organized with 5 or less editors as its members.

 

If the Chief Editor wishes to call an Ethics Committee meeting, he/she shall inform the members of the meeting agenda at least 5 days prior to the meeting.

 

Article 20 (Fact-finding Investigation and Deliberation Period)

 

In any case where a report is filed as specified in Article 18.1, the Ethics Committee must immediately start fact-finding investigation while at the same time providing the author of the paper subject to such investigation ample opportunities for explanation.

 

Regarding a report filed as Article 18.1, the Ethics Committee must complete deliberation and decision-making within 60 days from the reported date.

 

Article 21 (Open Meetings)

 

Any meeting of the Ethics Committee is not open to the public.

 

A member of the Ethics Committee shall not divulge any information obtained through the process of investigation of research ethics violation without justifiable reasons.

 

Article 22 (Notification of the Deliberation Result)

 

When the Ethics Committee makes a decision on any case of research ethics violation, the Chief Editor shall notify the author of the paper that had undergone deliberation within 2 days after decision announcement.

 

Article 23 (Re-deliberation Request and the Right of Reply)

 

Anyone who is informed as violating the research ethics as specified in Article 22 has the right of reply or to request for re-deliberation of the Ethics Committee decision within 14 days after receiving notification.

 

Article 24 (Research Ethics Violation Proceeding)

 

When any case of research ethics violation is confirmed through deliberation, the result is sent to the violator and the following actions are taken:

 

Publication of any paper violating the research ethics in the ‘Informatization Policy’ is disapproved. As for any paper already published, yet found as violating the research ethics, it shall be deleted from the list of papers in ‘Informatization Policy’ and from the website search engines.

 

In any case where a paper violating the research ethics is published in another journal, the information shall be officially delivered to the Chief Editor of the journal or to the relevant institution

 

The author of a paper violating the research ethics is forbidden to contribute another paper to or publish it in the ‘Informatization Policy’ for at least 3 years.

 

In any case where an editor violates any of the regulations under the Ethics for Editors, he/she can be dismissed from the position through the Editorial Committee discussion.

 

In any case where an examiner violates any of the regulations under the Ethics for Examiners, the Editorial Committee can discontinue request for examination and appoint a new examiner.

 

Article 25 (Confirmation of Research Ethics Compliance)

 

Paper contributors, editors and examiners are required to sign the Confirmation of Research Ethics Compliance to prove their commitment.

 

Article 26

As for any matter not specified in this set of regulations, it shall be referred to the general customs and practices.

 

Addition (2008. 6. 3)

 

The Regulations shall enter into force on 1 August 2008.

 

Addition (2011. 12. 1)

 

The Regulations shall enter into force on 4 December 2011.