Publication Ethics
Korean Journal of Religious Education
Research Ethics Regulations
Enacted July 6, 2007.
July 30, 2017., 1st Partial Amendment
October 5, 2018., 2nd Partial Amendment
Chapter 1 Ethics regulations related to research
Section 1 Research ethics regulations to be complied with by the author
Article 1 (Plagiarism)
The author shall not represent others’ research or part of their claims as if they were the author’s own research results or opinions in his or her writing or submission. The source research results of others may be specified and referenced, but the representation of a part of such information as if they were the author’s research results or opinions shall be determined as plagiarism.
Article 2 (Publication results)
The author takes responsibility and is recognized for the research that he or she undertook. In regards to the publication of researchers’ names on the paper or other published works, the order of the researchers must accurately reflect the amount of contribution provided by each author, regardless of their relative ranks. Acknowledging one as an author or as the leading author merely based on their higher position cannot be justified. In addition, omitting joint researchers or co-authors despite their contribution to the research or the writing also cannot be justified. No matter how small the contribution to the research or writing, such contributors shall be appropriately mentioned in the footnotes, preface, or acknowledgement sections of the paper. Authors must accurately disclose author information such as affiliation and position in the submitted paper. For example, if he or she is affiliated with a university or school, his or her position (professor, lecturer, teacher or student) should be disclosed in the manuscript.
Article 3 (Overlapping publications in research results or duplicate publications)
The writer shall not attempt to publish/submit his or her research results (including results scheduled to be published or under review) that had been previously published, whether domestically or internationally, as if the results are new. When the researcher seeks to use previously published research results in his or her publication, the author must inform the Editor of the current journal in which he or she wishes to publish the article about his or her previous publication, and check whether there will be issues regarding overlapping or duplicate publication.
Article 4 (Citations and references)
When citing published academic materials, efforts must be made to ensure accuracy, and sources of materials outside common sense must be cited clearly. Materials obtained through the evaluation of papers or research proposals or through personal contact may be used after receiving consent from the researcher(s) who has provided said information. When another person’s writings have been used or their ideas have been borrowed (referred to), the writer must declare the use or reference to such information through notes. Through such declarations, the readers must be able to differentiate between existing research results and the writer’s original opinions, claims, and interpretations.
Article 5 (Revision of the manuscripts)
The author must try to reflect the opinions of the Editorial Board expressed in the manuscript evaluation process into the submission, and when in disagreement with their opinions, he or she must inform the Editorial Board of the grounds and reasons for this disagreement in detail.
Section 2 Research ethics regulations to be complied with by the Board
Article 1
The Board has full responsibility in determining the publications of submitted manuscripts, and must respect the author’s character and independence as a scholar.
Article 2
The Board must stay impartial not only to the author’s gender, age, and the affiliated organization, but also to any preconceptions of and personal acquaintanceship with the author.
Article 3
The Board must request an assessment of the submitted manuscript by an evaluator who has specialized knowledge in the relevant field as well as the ability to make impartial judgments. Efforts must be made to provide an objective assessment by avoiding appointments of evaluators who have inappropriately close relationships or hostile attitudes towards the author. However, the counsel of a third evaluator who specializes in the field may be sought when there is a noticeable difference in the evaluations.
Article 4
The editorial board does not appoint a contributor as a member of the review committee in accordance with Article 3. In addition, a person who works in the same institution as the contributor is not appointed as a reviewer for the paper reviewed in the same issue.
Article 5
The Board must not inform anyone of the matters relating to the author or the consent of the paper until it has been decided whether the submitted paper will be published, with the exception of the evaluators.
Section 3 Research ethics regulations to be complied by the peer-reviewers
Article 1
Peer-reviewers must evaluate the submission as requested by the editorial board within the time designated by the evaluation regulations, and must inform the evaluation results to the Board (commission). If peer-reviewers feel they are not qualified to evaluate the content of the submission, they must inform the editorial board of this information without delay.
Article 2
Peer-reviewers must fairly evaluate the paper using an objective and impartial standard, disregarding personal scholarly beliefs and acquaintanceship with the author. The paper subject to evaluation must not be assessed without having been carefully read. Peer-reviewers must not devalue the work without adequate grounds or exclude the paper from publishing opportunities on the basis that it conflicts with the peer-reviewer's personal opinions and interpretations.
Article 3
Peer-reviewers must respect the author’s character and independence as an intellectual. The written opinion statement shall disclose the peer-reviewer’s judgment of the paper, and when the peer-reviewer wishes to recommend supplementation to a certain part of the work, the reasons for this suggestion must be explained in detail. Peer-reviewers shall use courteous and gentle expressions as much as possible, and refrain from expressions that degrade or insult the author.
Article 4
Evaluators must withhold information about the paper subject to evaluation. It is advised that evaluators do not show the paper to another person or discuss its contents with another person, unless they are specifically seeking advice for its evaluation. In addition, the content of the paper must not be used without the consent of the author until the academic journal in which it is published is distributed.
Chapter 2 Index of enforcement of ethics regulations
Article 1 (Oath to ethics regulations)
Researchers wishing to submit manuscripts to the Korean Journal of Religious Education must vow to abide by its ethics regulations. New members of the Association shall pledge to comply with the Research Ethics Regulations. Existing members shall be deemed to have pledged to abide by the Research Ethics Regulations as soon as they take effect.
Article 2 (Scope of research misconduct)
Research misconduct including plagiarism, unjustified authorship, duplicate submission or duplicate publication of research articles, etc., is defined as follows.
“Plagiarism” is defined as the appropriation of other researchers’ works protected by intellectual property laws, concepts or ideas, hypotheses, theories, or results without proper permission or attribution.
"Unjustified authorship" is also prohibited. When joint research is published, the order of authorship should accurately reflect the degree of responsibility and contribution of the collaborating authors. One must not take credit as the lead author simply based on his or her position in the academic hierarchy. Therefore, the lead author and corresponding author must be determined in accordance with their roles and responsibilities in the research.
“Duplicate publication” refers to the act of submitting or publishing previously published research as if it were new research.
Chapter 3 Status, Composition, Operation, and Authority of the Research Ethics Committee
Article 1 (Status of the Research Ethics Committee)
The Research Ethics Committee has an independent status.
Article 2 (Composition and operation of the Research Ethics Committee)
- The Ethics Committee shall be composed of at least five members. The chairman and members shall be commissioned by the association president with the recommendation of the board of directors. The Research Ethics Committee makes a final decision on whether or not the ethics rules are violated and disciplinary action with the attendance of 2/3 of the enrolled members and the consent of 2/3 of the members present. However, members with interests in violations are excluded from the decision process.
- A workshop to improve the professionalism of the ethics committee should be held at least once a year.
Article 3 (Authority of the Research Ethics Committee)
The ethics commission may conduct a wide investigation in regards to the informers, examinees, witnesses, testifiers, and evidentiary materials in regards to issues reported as a violation of the ethics regulations. It may recommend appropriate disciplinary actions to the association president when the reported offences are found to be true.
Chapter 4 Procedures and follow-up management for allegations of ethical misconduct
Article 1 (Reporting Violations of Ethical Guidelines)
If a member of the Association recognizes that another member has violated the Research Ethics Regulations, he or she should try to rectify the problem by reminding the member of the code of ethics. However, if the problem is not rectified or if there is a clear violation of the ethical rules, it can be reported to the ethics committee of the Research Ethics Committee. The research ethics committee must not reveal the reporting researcher’s identity to the public.
Article 2 (Investigation and Deliberation)
A member who has been reported for a suspected violation of the ethical rules of the Association must actively cooperate with the research ethics committee's investigation. Failure to cooperate is also considered an ethical violation.
Article 3 (Opportunity to Comment)
According to the reporting or committee's own judgment, the editorial board must examine whether there is any misconduct. In case of violation, a researcher who has been reported for violating ethical guidelines shall be given sufficient opportunity to respond to the allegation.
Article 4 (Subject anonymity)
Until the Board makes its ultimate decision on the ethics regulation violation and makes a disciplinary order, the ethics commission must not reveal the relevant researcher’s identity to the public.
Article 5 (Disciplinary procedure and penalties)
Once a disciplinary action recommendation is made by the ethics commission, the Editor-in-Chief shall call the Board for an ultimate decision on the disciplinary procedure and penalties. Researchers who have been found to have breached ethical regulations may be issued with disciplinary actions such as warnings or prohibitions from submission, and other organizations or individuals may be informed. If an unethical act by a peer-reviewer occurs, the reviewer will not be appointed as an evaluation in the future.
ADDENDUM
Article 1 (Amendments to the Research Ethics Regulations)
The procedure for amending the Research Ethics Regulations is in accordance with the revision procedure for the rules of the Korean Association for Religious Education. If the Research Ethics Regulations is amended, the member who has pledged to abide by the existing regulations will be deemed to have pledged to abide by the new regulations without additional pledges.
Article 2 (Enforcement and Force)
This regulation shall enter into force on the date, July 6, 2007. The same principle applies to manuscripts published before the enforcement of this regulation.
This regulation shall enter into force on the date of its 1st partial amendment (July30, 2017).
This regulation shall enter into force on the date of its 2nd partial amendment (October 5, 2017).