The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
「핵의학기술」 연구출판윤리
Mar. 23. 2023
Oct. 21. 2024
Apr. 04. 2026
Chapter 1: General Provisions
Article 1 (Purpose)
These Regulations set forth the fundamental principles and guidelines concerning the roles and responsibilities necessary to ensure research ethics among persons engaged in research activities associated with the Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine Technology (KSNMT; hereinafter the “Society”) and establish measures to prevent research misconduct.
These Regulations set forth the fundamental principles and guidelines concerning the roles and responsibilities necessary to ensure research ethics among persons engaged in research activities associated with the Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine Technology (KSNMT; hereinafter the “Society”) and establish measures to prevent research misconduct.
Article 2 (Applicability)
(1) These Regulations apply to all members of the Society and all persons who submit manuscripts to The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology (KJNMT; hereinafter the “Journal”). Such members and persons are hereinafter collectively referred to as “Researchers.”
(2) Reviewers, members of the Editorial Board, and any other persons involved in the Journal’s peer-review, editing, or publication processes shall be subject to the provisions relevant to their respective duties.
(1) These Regulations apply to all members of the Society and all persons who submit manuscripts to The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology (KJNMT; hereinafter the “Journal”). Such members and persons are hereinafter collectively referred to as “Researchers.”
(2) Reviewers, members of the Editorial Board, and any other persons involved in the Journal’s peer-review, editing, or publication processes shall be subject to the provisions relevant to their respective duties.
Article 3 (Scope)
These Regulations shall apply except where other laws or regulations contain specific provisions concerning research ethics or research integrity in a particular field of research.
These Regulations shall apply except where other laws or regulations contain specific provisions concerning research ethics or research integrity in a particular field of research.
Chapter 2: Integrity and Social Responsibility of Researchers
Article 4 (Research Integrity)
(1) Researchers shall conduct all research activities, including proposing and conducting research, reporting and presenting research findings, and reviewing or evaluating research, honestly and with integrity.
(2) The content and significance of research shall be described objectively and accurately, and research findings shall not be arbitrarily deleted or added.
(3) All research activities shall be conducted without bias or preconception.
(1) Researchers shall conduct all research activities, including proposing and conducting research, reporting and presenting research findings, and reviewing or evaluating research, honestly and with integrity.
(2) The content and significance of research shall be described objectively and accurately, and research findings shall not be arbitrarily deleted or added.
(3) All research activities shall be conducted without bias or preconception.
Article 5 (Duties to Record, Preserve, Report, and Disclose Research Information)
(1) All research information shall be clearly and accurately recorded, processed, and preserved so that it can be properly interpreted and verified.
(2) Researchers shall use appropriate study designs and statistical methods and disclose them when necessary.
(1) All research information shall be clearly and accurately recorded, processed, and preserved so that it can be properly interpreted and verified.
(2) Researchers shall use appropriate study designs and statistical methods and disclose them when necessary.
Article 6 (Responsibilities of Researchers)
Researchers shall conduct research autonomously on the basis of academic freedom and shall comply with the following requirements:
1. Respect the dignity of research participants and treat them fairly.
2. Protect the personal information and privacy of research participants.
3. Conduct research honestly and transparently on the basis of facts.
4. Maintain academic integrity when sharing professional knowledge with society.
5. Disseminate new scholarly findings and contribute to the advancement of knowledge.
6. Acknowledge and respect the achievements of prior researchers, including by providing appropriate attribution when using their works.
7. Remain free from improper influence by funding organizations and disclose all financial and non-financial relationships and activities related to the research.
8. Accurately disclose author information, including affiliation and position, when reporting research findings in order to enhance the credibility of the research.
9. Participate continuously in research ethics education.
10. Use research funds for their intended research purposes and manage them transparently and fairly in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
Researchers shall conduct research autonomously on the basis of academic freedom and shall comply with the following requirements:
1. Respect the dignity of research participants and treat them fairly.
2. Protect the personal information and privacy of research participants.
3. Conduct research honestly and transparently on the basis of facts.
4. Maintain academic integrity when sharing professional knowledge with society.
5. Disseminate new scholarly findings and contribute to the advancement of knowledge.
6. Acknowledge and respect the achievements of prior researchers, including by providing appropriate attribution when using their works.
7. Remain free from improper influence by funding organizations and disclose all financial and non-financial relationships and activities related to the research.
8. Accurately disclose author information, including affiliation and position, when reporting research findings in order to enhance the credibility of the research.
9. Participate continuously in research ethics education.
10. Use research funds for their intended research purposes and manage them transparently and fairly in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
Article 7 (Use of Research Findings)
Researchers shall ensure that the dissemination and use of research findings are consistent with academic integrity. In particular, research findings shall not be distorted or exaggerated for the purpose of enhancing reputation or securing research funding.
Researchers shall ensure that the dissemination and use of research findings are consistent with academic integrity. In particular, research findings shall not be distorted or exaggerated for the purpose of enhancing reputation or securing research funding.
Article 8 (Social Contribution of Research)
Researchers shall endeavor to promote social benefit through their research and to ensure that their work serves the public interest. Researchers shall recognize the potential impact of their research on society and fulfill their professional responsibilities.
Researchers shall endeavor to promote social benefit through their research and to ensure that their work serves the public interest. Researchers shall recognize the potential impact of their research on society and fulfill their professional responsibilities.
Article 9 (Compliance with Applicable Laws and Regulations)
Researchers shall respect intellectual property rights, including patent rights and copyrights, and shall comply with all laws and regulations applicable to their research.
Researchers shall respect intellectual property rights, including patent rights and copyrights, and shall comply with all laws and regulations applicable to their research.
Chapter 3: Fairness in Relationships among Researchers
Article 10 (Collaborative Research)
Researchers who engage in collaborative research shall clearly define their respective roles and relationships and shall fulfill the responsibilities arising from them.
Researchers who engage in collaborative research shall clearly define their respective roles and relationships and shall fulfill the responsibilities arising from them.
Article 11 (Authors’ Responsibilities and Obligations)
(1) All authors shall comply with the criteria for authorship, order of authors, and author affiliations set forth in Articles 13 through 15 and shall share responsibility for the content of the manuscript and the integrity of the research.
(2) Each author shall verify the accuracy and completeness of the portions to which they contributed and shall cooperate in the investigation and resolution of any questions concerning the accuracy or integrity of the manuscript.
(3) All authors shall consider the potential misuse of research findings and take necessary measures to minimize such risks.
(4) Research involving human participants shall comply with the latest version of the World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki. The manuscript shall state whether approval was obtained from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) and whether prior informed consent was obtained from the research participants. Animal research shall receive approval from an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), and the manuscript shall state whether such approval was obtained.
(1) All authors shall comply with the criteria for authorship, order of authors, and author affiliations set forth in Articles 13 through 15 and shall share responsibility for the content of the manuscript and the integrity of the research.
(2) Each author shall verify the accuracy and completeness of the portions to which they contributed and shall cooperate in the investigation and resolution of any questions concerning the accuracy or integrity of the manuscript.
(3) All authors shall consider the potential misuse of research findings and take necessary measures to minimize such risks.
(4) Research involving human participants shall comply with the latest version of the World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki. The manuscript shall state whether approval was obtained from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) and whether prior informed consent was obtained from the research participants. Animal research shall receive approval from an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), and the manuscript shall state whether such approval was obtained.
Article 12 (Roles of the Corresponding Author or Guarantor)
(1) The corresponding author or Guarantor shall bear overall responsibility for the data presented in the manuscript, authorship attribution, the research findings, and their substantiation, and shall also be responsible for managing and supervising the coauthors’ contributions to the research reported in the manuscript.
(2) The corresponding author shall confirm that the order of authors and the inclusion of coauthors were determined according to each author’s contributions and the agreement of all authors and shall be responsible for providing an explanation when necessary.
(1) The corresponding author or Guarantor shall bear overall responsibility for the data presented in the manuscript, authorship attribution, the research findings, and their substantiation, and shall also be responsible for managing and supervising the coauthors’ contributions to the research reported in the manuscript.
(2) The corresponding author shall confirm that the order of authors and the inclusion of coauthors were determined according to each author’s contributions and the agreement of all authors and shall be responsible for providing an explanation when necessary.
Article 13 (Criteria for Authorship)
(1) Authorship shall comply with the authorship criteria in the Journal’s Instructions for Authors. Every person listed as an author shall satisfy all of the following criteria:
1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
2. Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content.
3. Final approval of the version to be published.
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work by ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
(2) A person who has not made a scholarly or technical contribution to the research content or findings shall not be listed as an author merely as an expression of gratitude or courtesy. Contributions such as data collection or entry, or translation into another language, may instead be described in the acknowledgments.
(3) Every person who has made a substantial contribution to collaborative research shall be recognized as a coauthor. The following forms of authorship attribution are inappropriate:
1. Ghost authorship: excluding from the author list a person who played a major role in the research.
2. Gift or honorary authorship: listing as an author a person who does not meet the criteria for authorship.
3. Reciprocal gift authorship: researchers listing one another as authors on their respective works in order to inflate their publication records.
4. Misappropriated authorship: listing a prominent researcher who did not participate in the research as an author without that person’s permission.
(4) Artificial intelligence (AI) tools shall not be listed as authors. If an AI tool makes a significant contribution to the research, the nature of its use shall be disclosed in the Methods and Acknowledgments sections.
(1) Authorship shall comply with the authorship criteria in the Journal’s Instructions for Authors. Every person listed as an author shall satisfy all of the following criteria:
1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
2. Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content.
3. Final approval of the version to be published.
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work by ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
(2) A person who has not made a scholarly or technical contribution to the research content or findings shall not be listed as an author merely as an expression of gratitude or courtesy. Contributions such as data collection or entry, or translation into another language, may instead be described in the acknowledgments.
(3) Every person who has made a substantial contribution to collaborative research shall be recognized as a coauthor. The following forms of authorship attribution are inappropriate:
1. Ghost authorship: excluding from the author list a person who played a major role in the research.
2. Gift or honorary authorship: listing as an author a person who does not meet the criteria for authorship.
3. Reciprocal gift authorship: researchers listing one another as authors on their respective works in order to inflate their publication records.
4. Misappropriated authorship: listing a prominent researcher who did not participate in the research as an author without that person’s permission.
(4) Artificial intelligence (AI) tools shall not be listed as authors. If an AI tool makes a significant contribution to the research, the nature of its use shall be disclosed in the Methods and Acknowledgments sections.
Article 14 (Order of Authors)
The order of authors shall be determined fairly by agreement among all authors and shall reflect their respective contributions to the research.
The order of authors shall be determined fairly by agreement among all authors and shall reflect their respective contributions to the research.
Article 15 (Author Affiliations)
As a general rule, an author’s affiliation shall be the institution with which the author was affiliated when the research and writing were performed. Different conventions may be followed in fields where such conventions are generally accepted.
As a general rule, an author’s affiliation shall be the institution with which the author was affiliated when the research and writing were performed. Different conventions may be followed in fields where such conventions are generally accepted.
Chapter 4: Research Misconduct and Other Unethical Research Practices
Article 16 (Definitions)
(1) “Research misconduct” means any of the following acts committed in proposing or conducting a research and development project or in reporting or presenting its results:
1. “Fabrication” means making, recording, or reporting research raw data, research data, or research findings that do not exist.
2. “Falsification” means manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or arbitrarily altering or omitting research raw data or research data, so that the research content or findings are distorted.
3. “Plagiarism” means using another person’s original ideas or creative works, other than common knowledge, without appropriate attribution in a manner that causes a third party to perceive them as one’s own. Plagiarism includes the following acts:
(a) Using all or part of another person’s research without attribution.
(b) Using another person’s work after altering words or sentence structure without attribution.
(c) Using another person’s original ideas without attribution.
(d) Translating and using another person’s work without attribution.
4. “Inappropriate authorship attribution” means, without valid reason, denying authorship to a person who contributed to the research content or findings, or granting authorship to a person who did not contribute, including for reasons of gratitude or courtesy. It includes the following acts:
(a) Granting authorship to a person who made no contribution to the research content or findings.
(b) Failing to grant authorship to a person who contributed to the research content or findings.
5. “Improper duplicate publication” means publishing a work that is identical or substantially similar to one’s previous research findings without attribution and thereby obtaining an improper benefit, such as research funding or separate recognition as a research achievement.
6. “Interference with an investigation of research misconduct” means intentionally obstructing an investigation into one’s own or another person’s misconduct or causing harm to an Informant.
7. Any other act that seriously deviates from practices commonly accepted in the relevant academic field.
(2) An “Informant” means a person who reports to the Society facts or evidence indicating research misconduct.
(3) A “Respondent” means a person against whom an allegation of research misconduct is directed on the basis of a report or the Society’s own knowledge, or a person who, during an investigation, is suspected of having participated in the misconduct and becomes subject to the investigation. A witness or other person providing information during the investigation is not a Respondent.
(4) A “Preliminary Inquiry” means the procedure used to determine whether a Formal Investigation into an allegation of research misconduct is warranted.
(5) A “Formal Investigation” means the procedure used to determine whether research misconduct occurred.
(6) A “Determination” means the procedure by which the investigation results are finalized and communicated in writing to the Informant and the Respondent.
(1) “Research misconduct” means any of the following acts committed in proposing or conducting a research and development project or in reporting or presenting its results:
1. “Fabrication” means making, recording, or reporting research raw data, research data, or research findings that do not exist.
2. “Falsification” means manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or arbitrarily altering or omitting research raw data or research data, so that the research content or findings are distorted.
3. “Plagiarism” means using another person’s original ideas or creative works, other than common knowledge, without appropriate attribution in a manner that causes a third party to perceive them as one’s own. Plagiarism includes the following acts:
(a) Using all or part of another person’s research without attribution.
(b) Using another person’s work after altering words or sentence structure without attribution.
(c) Using another person’s original ideas without attribution.
(d) Translating and using another person’s work without attribution.
4. “Inappropriate authorship attribution” means, without valid reason, denying authorship to a person who contributed to the research content or findings, or granting authorship to a person who did not contribute, including for reasons of gratitude or courtesy. It includes the following acts:
(a) Granting authorship to a person who made no contribution to the research content or findings.
(b) Failing to grant authorship to a person who contributed to the research content or findings.
5. “Improper duplicate publication” means publishing a work that is identical or substantially similar to one’s previous research findings without attribution and thereby obtaining an improper benefit, such as research funding or separate recognition as a research achievement.
6. “Interference with an investigation of research misconduct” means intentionally obstructing an investigation into one’s own or another person’s misconduct or causing harm to an Informant.
7. Any other act that seriously deviates from practices commonly accepted in the relevant academic field.
(2) An “Informant” means a person who reports to the Society facts or evidence indicating research misconduct.
(3) A “Respondent” means a person against whom an allegation of research misconduct is directed on the basis of a report or the Society’s own knowledge, or a person who, during an investigation, is suspected of having participated in the misconduct and becomes subject to the investigation. A witness or other person providing information during the investigation is not a Respondent.
(4) A “Preliminary Inquiry” means the procedure used to determine whether a Formal Investigation into an allegation of research misconduct is warranted.
(5) A “Formal Investigation” means the procedure used to determine whether research misconduct occurred.
(6) A “Determination” means the procedure by which the investigation results are finalized and communicated in writing to the Informant and the Respondent.
Article 17 (Citation Methods and Principles)
(1) Authors may quote or cite portions of another person’s work in the original language or in translation for purposes such as introduction, reference, or commentary.
(2) Authors shall prepare citations and reference lists accurately. All citation elements, including author names, journal volume and issue numbers, page numbers, and publication years, shall be verified directly against the original source rather than relying on a secondary source. If reliance on a secondary source is unavoidable, the secondary citation shall be clearly identified.
(3) Authors shall use cited works in a reasonable manner and in good faith so that the cited material is clearly distinguishable from their own work.
(4) As a general rule, authors shall cite publicly available works. If unpublished scholarly material is obtained through peer review, review of a research proposal, or private communication, the consent of the Researcher concerned shall be obtained before the material is cited.
(5) When adapting a theory or idea previously published by another person for inclusion in their own work, authors shall identify the source.
(6) When drawing extensively from a single source, authors shall write in a manner that allows readers to distinguish clearly between the authors’ own ideas and ideas taken from that source.
(7) Authors shall include in the references important publicly available works that substantially influenced the direction of the research or assist readers in understanding it. This requirement does not apply to common knowledge that Researchers in the field may reasonably be expected to know.
(8) Authors shall not cite a full journal article in the reference list when only its abstract was consulted, or cite the final published version when the version actually consulted was an early or preliminary version contained in conference proceedings.
(9) Authors who use an AI tool shall clearly disclose its use in their work and shall bear final responsibility for the content.
(1) Authors may quote or cite portions of another person’s work in the original language or in translation for purposes such as introduction, reference, or commentary.
(2) Authors shall prepare citations and reference lists accurately. All citation elements, including author names, journal volume and issue numbers, page numbers, and publication years, shall be verified directly against the original source rather than relying on a secondary source. If reliance on a secondary source is unavoidable, the secondary citation shall be clearly identified.
(3) Authors shall use cited works in a reasonable manner and in good faith so that the cited material is clearly distinguishable from their own work.
(4) As a general rule, authors shall cite publicly available works. If unpublished scholarly material is obtained through peer review, review of a research proposal, or private communication, the consent of the Researcher concerned shall be obtained before the material is cited.
(5) When adapting a theory or idea previously published by another person for inclusion in their own work, authors shall identify the source.
(6) When drawing extensively from a single source, authors shall write in a manner that allows readers to distinguish clearly between the authors’ own ideas and ideas taken from that source.
(7) Authors shall include in the references important publicly available works that substantially influenced the direction of the research or assist readers in understanding it. This requirement does not apply to common knowledge that Researchers in the field may reasonably be expected to know.
(8) Authors shall not cite a full journal article in the reference list when only its abstract was consulted, or cite the final published version when the version actually consulted was an early or preliminary version contained in conference proceedings.
(9) Authors who use an AI tool shall clearly disclose its use in their work and shall bear final responsibility for the content.
Article 18 (Citation of Common Knowledge)
(1) The source shall be identified when another person’s idea or factual information is used. This requirement does not apply to information that is widely known or that readers may reasonably be expected to know.
(2) If it is unclear whether a concept or fact constitutes common knowledge, a citation shall be provided.
(1) The source shall be identified when another person’s idea or factual information is used. This requirement does not apply to information that is widely known or that readers may reasonably be expected to know.
(2) If it is unclear whether a concept or fact constitutes common knowledge, a citation shall be provided.
Article 19 (Idea Plagiarism)
(1) “Idea plagiarism” means using all or part of another person’s idea, including an explanation, theory, conclusion, hypothesis, or metaphor, either verbatim or with superficial modification, without acknowledging the originator’s contribution.
(2) Authors have an ethical duty to acknowledge the sources of ideas, ordinarily through footnotes or citations.
(3) Authors shall not appropriate another person’s ideas learned through peer review of a research proposal or submitted manuscript without appropriate attribution and citation.
(1) “Idea plagiarism” means using all or part of another person’s idea, including an explanation, theory, conclusion, hypothesis, or metaphor, either verbatim or with superficial modification, without acknowledging the originator’s contribution.
(2) Authors have an ethical duty to acknowledge the sources of ideas, ordinarily through footnotes or citations.
(3) Authors shall not appropriate another person’s ideas learned through peer review of a research proposal or submitted manuscript without appropriate attribution and citation.
Article 20 (Text Plagiarism)
“Text plagiarism” means copying a portion of text written by another person without identifying the author.
“Text plagiarism” means copying a portion of text written by another person without identifying the author.
Article 21 (Mosaic Plagiarism)
“Mosaic plagiarism” means combining portions of another person’s text, adding or inserting words, or substituting synonyms while failing to identify the original author and source.
“Mosaic plagiarism” means combining portions of another person’s text, adding or inserting words, or substituting synonyms while failing to identify the original author and source.
Article 22 (Duplicate Publication)
(1) A later article constitutes duplicate publication when its main content is the same as that of the author’s previously published article, even if it uses wording that presents a somewhat different perspective or includes a somewhat different analysis of the same data.
(2) If secondary publication is intended for a different readership that is unlikely to have access to the previously published article, prior approval shall be obtained from the editors of both journals, and the author shall inform readers that the same article was previously published in another journal. The same requirement applies when an article published in one language is translated and published in another journal in a different language.
(3) The same manuscript shall not be submitted simultaneously to different journals. As a general rule, a manuscript may be submitted to another journal only after the first journal has decided not to publish it.
(1) A later article constitutes duplicate publication when its main content is the same as that of the author’s previously published article, even if it uses wording that presents a somewhat different perspective or includes a somewhat different analysis of the same data.
(2) If secondary publication is intended for a different readership that is unlikely to have access to the previously published article, prior approval shall be obtained from the editors of both journals, and the author shall inform readers that the same article was previously published in another journal. The same requirement applies when an article published in one language is translated and published in another journal in a different language.
(3) The same manuscript shall not be submitted simultaneously to different journals. As a general rule, a manuscript may be submitted to another journal only after the first journal has decided not to publish it.
Article 23 (Prevention of Copyright Infringement)
(1) Authors retain copyright in articles published in the Journal. Articles are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), and any use must provide appropriate attribution to the author and source.
(2) Authors shall ensure that their manuscripts do not infringe third-party copyright. When using copyright-protected material, authors shall obtain any necessary permission and accurately identify the source.
(3) Authors shall be aware that extensive quotation from or adaptation of copyright-protected material may constitute copyright infringement even when quotation marks or paraphrasing are used.
(1) Authors retain copyright in articles published in the Journal. Articles are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), and any use must provide appropriate attribution to the author and source.
(2) Authors shall ensure that their manuscripts do not infringe third-party copyright. When using copyright-protected material, authors shall obtain any necessary permission and accurately identify the source.
(3) Authors shall be aware that extensive quotation from or adaptation of copyright-protected material may constitute copyright infringement even when quotation marks or paraphrasing are used.
Article 24 (Unethical Conduct in Peer Review)
Reviewers shall not engage in any of the following conduct:
1. Using information learned during peer review in research with which the reviewer is directly or indirectly involved, without the original author’s consent.
2. Making statements during peer review that defame the author or constitute a personal attack.
3. Delegating an assigned review to a third party.
4. Reviewing or evaluating a manuscript without reading it.
5. Uploading all or part of a manuscript, or any other confidential review material, to an AI tool for which confidentiality cannot be assured.
6. Using an AI tool without clearly reporting to the Editor-in-Chief, as required by Article 6(3) of the Manuscript Review Regulations, the tool used, the purpose and scope of use, and the outcome of such use.
Reviewers shall not engage in any of the following conduct:
1. Using information learned during peer review in research with which the reviewer is directly or indirectly involved, without the original author’s consent.
2. Making statements during peer review that defame the author or constitute a personal attack.
3. Delegating an assigned review to a third party.
4. Reviewing or evaluating a manuscript without reading it.
5. Uploading all or part of a manuscript, or any other confidential review material, to an AI tool for which confidentiality cannot be assured.
6. Using an AI tool without clearly reporting to the Editor-in-Chief, as required by Article 6(3) of the Manuscript Review Regulations, the tool used, the purpose and scope of use, and the outcome of such use.
Article 25 (Other Unethical Research Practices)
The following conduct may constitute an ethically inappropriate research practice:
1. Falsely stating or reporting research achievements or research findings.
2. Presenting research at an academic conference or seminar without appropriately acknowledging the collaborative nature of the work.
3. Conducting research that may harm human life or health or infringe human rights.
The following conduct may constitute an ethically inappropriate research practice:
1. Falsely stating or reporting research achievements or research findings.
2. Presenting research at an academic conference or seminar without appropriately acknowledging the collaborative nature of the work.
3. Conducting research that may harm human life or health or infringe human rights.
Article 26 (Inappropriate Writing Practices)
The following conduct constitutes an inappropriate writing practice:
1. Citing a source inappropriately.
2. Distorting the references.
3. Citing a published article solely on the basis of its abstract or similar secondary information.
4. Citing a work that the author has not read or understood.
5. Drawing extensively from a single source while providing attribution for only part of the borrowed material.
6. Reusing the author’s own previously published text without appropriate attribution.
7. Dividing findings that should be reported in a single article into multiple articles for the purpose of inflating the author’s publication record.
8. Failing to disclose the use of an AI tool or presenting unverified AI-generated content as the author’s own research findings.
The following conduct constitutes an inappropriate writing practice:
1. Citing a source inappropriately.
2. Distorting the references.
3. Citing a published article solely on the basis of its abstract or similar secondary information.
4. Citing a work that the author has not read or understood.
5. Drawing extensively from a single source while providing attribution for only part of the borrowed material.
6. Reusing the author’s own previously published text without appropriate attribution.
7. Dividing findings that should be reported in a single article into multiple articles for the purpose of inflating the author’s publication record.
8. Failing to disclose the use of an AI tool or presenting unverified AI-generated content as the author’s own research findings.
Article 27 (Prohibition against Distortion of References)
(1) The reference list shall include only works directly relevant to the manuscript. A work of uncertain relevance shall not be intentionally included for the purpose of manipulating a journal or article citation metric or increasing the likelihood of acceptance.
(2) Authors shall not selectively include only references that support their data or theory. Authors have an ethical duty to cite works that may conflict with their position.
(1) The reference list shall include only works directly relevant to the manuscript. A work of uncertain relevance shall not be intentionally included for the purpose of manipulating a journal or article citation metric or increasing the likelihood of acceptance.
(2) Authors shall not selectively include only references that support their data or theory. Authors have an ethical duty to cite works that may conflict with their position.
Article 28 (Gendered Innovations Policy)
Articles published in the Journal shall comply in good faith with the Gendered Innovations Guidelines (https://gister.re.kr). Authors shall distinguish accurately between sex and gender in describing the research. Research shall include both male and female participants and compare results by sex or gender, as appropriate. A study limited to a single sex shall provide a scientifically valid justification.
Articles published in the Journal shall comply in good faith with the Gendered Innovations Guidelines (https://gister.re.kr). Authors shall distinguish accurately between sex and gender in describing the research. Research shall include both male and female participants and compare results by sex or gender, as appropriate. A study limited to a single sex shall provide a scientifically valid justification.
Chapter 5: Conflicts of Interest
Article 29 (Management of Conflicts of Interest)
(1) A “conflict of interest” means a situation in which any of the following interests or circumstances may adversely affect impartial professional judgment or the conduct of research:
1. Financial conflict of interest: a conflict arising from a Researcher’s financial interests related to the research.
2. Interpersonal conflict of interest: a conflict arising from personal relationships, institutional influence, personal disputes, or research competition.
3. Intellectual conflict of interest: a conflict arising from religious beliefs, worldview, moral convictions, or firm theoretical commitments relating to a particular type or field of research.
4. Conflict of commitment: a conflict arising when teaching, service, external activities, or other institutional responsibilities interfere with research activities.
(2) If a conflict of interest exists or may arise in the proposal, conduct, or reporting of research, or in the peer-review or editorial process, the Researcher, reviewer, or Editorial Board member concerned shall promptly disclose the relevant interest to the Society or the Editorial Board. Taking into account the nature and extent of the conflict, the Society or the Editorial Board may take any of the following measures:
1. Disclose the interest in the relevant manuscript, report, peer-review record, or editorial record.
2. Require the person with the conflict to recuse themselves from, or exclude that person from, the relevant research, review, editorial, or decision-making process.
3. Arrange independent review or oversight by a person without the conflict.
4. Reassign the responsible person or suspend the relevant procedure, if necessary.
(1) A “conflict of interest” means a situation in which any of the following interests or circumstances may adversely affect impartial professional judgment or the conduct of research:
1. Financial conflict of interest: a conflict arising from a Researcher’s financial interests related to the research.
2. Interpersonal conflict of interest: a conflict arising from personal relationships, institutional influence, personal disputes, or research competition.
3. Intellectual conflict of interest: a conflict arising from religious beliefs, worldview, moral convictions, or firm theoretical commitments relating to a particular type or field of research.
4. Conflict of commitment: a conflict arising when teaching, service, external activities, or other institutional responsibilities interfere with research activities.
(2) If a conflict of interest exists or may arise in the proposal, conduct, or reporting of research, or in the peer-review or editorial process, the Researcher, reviewer, or Editorial Board member concerned shall promptly disclose the relevant interest to the Society or the Editorial Board. Taking into account the nature and extent of the conflict, the Society or the Editorial Board may take any of the following measures:
1. Disclose the interest in the relevant manuscript, report, peer-review record, or editorial record.
2. Require the person with the conflict to recuse themselves from, or exclude that person from, the relevant research, review, editorial, or decision-making process.
3. Arrange independent review or oversight by a person without the conflict.
4. Reassign the responsible person or suspend the relevant procedure, if necessary.
Article 30 (Research Misconduct Involving Coauthorship with Related Persons)
(1) “Research misconduct involving coauthorship with a related person” means listing a minor under 19 years of age or a family member, including a spouse, child, or relative within the fourth degree of kinship, as a coauthor without disclosing the relationship and using the article to obtain a public or private benefit, such as admission, advancement, employment, or promotion. A manuscript naming a related person as an author shall clearly demonstrate that person’s substantial contribution to the research findings and preparation of the manuscript.
(2) To prevent research misconduct involving coauthorship with related persons, the relevant information shall be accurately disclosed in the author information sections of the Author Checklist and Publication Submission Form submitted with the manuscript.
(1) “Research misconduct involving coauthorship with a related person” means listing a minor under 19 years of age or a family member, including a spouse, child, or relative within the fourth degree of kinship, as a coauthor without disclosing the relationship and using the article to obtain a public or private benefit, such as admission, advancement, employment, or promotion. A manuscript naming a related person as an author shall clearly demonstrate that person’s substantial contribution to the research findings and preparation of the manuscript.
(2) To prevent research misconduct involving coauthorship with related persons, the relevant information shall be accurately disclosed in the author information sections of the Author Checklist and Publication Submission Form submitted with the manuscript.
Chapter 6: Establishment and Operation of the Research Ethics Committee
Article 31 (Establishment)
The Society shall establish a Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Committee”) to deliberate on and investigate all matters concerning research and publication ethics of the Society and the Journal.
The Society shall establish a Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Committee”) to deliberate on and investigate all matters concerning research and publication ethics of the Society and the Journal.
Article 32 (Functions)
The Committee shall deliberate and decide on the following matters:
1. Establishment and operation of systems relating to research ethics and research integrity.
2. Establishment and operation of monitoring and management systems to prevent research misconduct and ensure compliance with research ethics within the Society and the Journal.
3. Receipt and handling of allegations of research misconduct.
4. Initiation of investigations into research misconduct and research ethics concerns, and approval of investigation results.
5. Measures to protect Informants and restore the reputation of Respondents.
6. Disposition of research integrity verification results and related follow-up measures.
7. Any other matter referred to the Committee by the Chairperson.
The Committee shall deliberate and decide on the following matters:
1. Establishment and operation of systems relating to research ethics and research integrity.
2. Establishment and operation of monitoring and management systems to prevent research misconduct and ensure compliance with research ethics within the Society and the Journal.
3. Receipt and handling of allegations of research misconduct.
4. Initiation of investigations into research misconduct and research ethics concerns, and approval of investigation results.
5. Measures to protect Informants and restore the reputation of Respondents.
6. Disposition of research integrity verification results and related follow-up measures.
7. Any other matter referred to the Committee by the Chairperson.
Article 33 (Composition)
(1) The Committee shall consist of one Chairperson of the Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Chairperson”), one Secretary, and five members.
(2) The Chairperson shall be appointed by the President of the Society. If the Chairperson is unable to perform their duties, a member designated by the Chairperson may act on the Chairperson’s behalf.
(3) The Secretary and members shall be appointed by the Chairperson.
(4) The term of office of the Chairperson, Secretary, and members shall be three years, and each may be reappointed.
(5) The Committee shall be guaranteed independence in exercising authority within the scope of its duties.
(1) The Committee shall consist of one Chairperson of the Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Chairperson”), one Secretary, and five members.
(2) The Chairperson shall be appointed by the President of the Society. If the Chairperson is unable to perform their duties, a member designated by the Chairperson may act on the Chairperson’s behalf.
(3) The Secretary and members shall be appointed by the Chairperson.
(4) The term of office of the Chairperson, Secretary, and members shall be three years, and each may be reappointed.
(5) The Committee shall be guaranteed independence in exercising authority within the scope of its duties.
Article 34 (Duties of the Chairperson and Secretary)
(1) The Chairperson shall represent the Committee and shall convene and preside over its meetings.
(2) The Secretary shall assist the Chairperson, plan and administer the Committee’s work, prepare the meeting minutes, and report significant resolutions to the President of the Society.
(3) If the Chairperson determines that a specific investigation of suspected research ethics violations is necessary, the Chairperson may establish a subcommittee. The subcommittee shall consist of no more than three members of the Editorial Board, none of whom may concurrently serve as a member of the Research Ethics Committee.
(1) The Chairperson shall represent the Committee and shall convene and preside over its meetings.
(2) The Secretary shall assist the Chairperson, plan and administer the Committee’s work, prepare the meeting minutes, and report significant resolutions to the President of the Society.
(3) If the Chairperson determines that a specific investigation of suspected research ethics violations is necessary, the Chairperson may establish a subcommittee. The subcommittee shall consist of no more than three members of the Editorial Board, none of whom may concurrently serve as a member of the Research Ethics Committee.
Article 35 (Meetings)
(1) The Chairperson shall convene the Committee when the Chairperson deems it necessary, when a majority of all serving members so request, or when a research ethics case is received. When a research ethics case is received, the Committee shall deliberate and decide on the case within 60 days after receipt.
(2) Meetings shall, in principle, be closed to the public.
(1) The Chairperson shall convene the Committee when the Chairperson deems it necessary, when a majority of all serving members so request, or when a research ethics case is received. When a research ethics case is received, the Committee shall deliberate and decide on the case within 60 days after receipt.
(2) Meetings shall, in principle, be closed to the public.
Article 36 (Quorum and Voting)
(1) A quorum shall consist of a majority of all serving members of the Committee. A resolution shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present and eligible to vote.
(2) The Chairperson shall not vote, except that the Chairperson shall cast the deciding vote in the event of a tie.
(1) A quorum shall consist of a majority of all serving members of the Committee. A resolution shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present and eligible to vote.
(2) The Chairperson shall not vote, except that the Chairperson shall cast the deciding vote in the event of a tie.
Article 37 (Attendance of Relevant Persons)
When the Committee deems it necessary, it may require relevant persons to attend a meeting and may hear their views.
When the Committee deems it necessary, it may require relevant persons to attend a meeting and may hear their views.
Article 38 (Authority and Responsibilities of the Committee)
(1) In the course of investigating research misconduct or a research ethics violation, the Committee may require an Informant, Respondent, or witness to appear and submit materials.
(2) The identity of an Informant or witness concerning research misconduct or a research ethics violation shall not be disclosed, and the Committee shall ensure that the reputation and rights of the Respondent are not infringed until the verification process is completed.
(3) The Committee shall maintain the confidentiality of all matters relating to its deliberations and investigations.
(4) If research misconduct or a research ethics violation is established, the Committee may decide, taking into account the nature and seriousness of the violation, to impose one or more of the following measures:
1. Issue a warning.
2. Cancel the submission of a manuscript under consideration.
3. Retract a published article and indicate in the Journal’s publication list and on the article that it was retracted for a research ethics violation.
4. Prohibit manuscript submission to the Journal for three years.
5. Publish notice of the research ethics violation on the Society’s website.
6. Notify the National Research Foundation of Korea and other relevant organizations of the research ethics violation.
(5) When a final Determination concerning a research ethics violation has been made, the Committee shall notify the Informant and the Respondent in writing without delay. An Informant or Respondent who objects to the Determination may request reconsideration once, within seven days after receiving notice. The Chairperson may dismiss a request for reconsideration if the Chairperson determines that no new grounds or evidence, beyond the facts already established, could affect the Determination.
(1) In the course of investigating research misconduct or a research ethics violation, the Committee may require an Informant, Respondent, or witness to appear and submit materials.
(2) The identity of an Informant or witness concerning research misconduct or a research ethics violation shall not be disclosed, and the Committee shall ensure that the reputation and rights of the Respondent are not infringed until the verification process is completed.
(3) The Committee shall maintain the confidentiality of all matters relating to its deliberations and investigations.
(4) If research misconduct or a research ethics violation is established, the Committee may decide, taking into account the nature and seriousness of the violation, to impose one or more of the following measures:
1. Issue a warning.
2. Cancel the submission of a manuscript under consideration.
3. Retract a published article and indicate in the Journal’s publication list and on the article that it was retracted for a research ethics violation.
4. Prohibit manuscript submission to the Journal for three years.
5. Publish notice of the research ethics violation on the Society’s website.
6. Notify the National Research Foundation of Korea and other relevant organizations of the research ethics violation.
(5) When a final Determination concerning a research ethics violation has been made, the Committee shall notify the Informant and the Respondent in writing without delay. An Informant or Respondent who objects to the Determination may request reconsideration once, within seven days after receiving notice. The Chairperson may dismiss a request for reconsideration if the Chairperson determines that no new grounds or evidence, beyond the facts already established, could affect the Determination.
Chapter 7: Verification of Research Integrity
Article 39 (Responsibility to Substantiate Research Integrity and Provide an Explanation)
If research misconduct is identified or alleged in a manuscript submitted to the Journal, the relevant Researcher shall be responsible for submitting materials capable of substantiating the integrity of the research and for providing an explanation. To prevent research misconduct and manage articles after publication, the Society shall impose no limitation period on the verification of research integrity.
If research misconduct is identified or alleged in a manuscript submitted to the Journal, the relevant Researcher shall be responsible for submitting materials capable of substantiating the integrity of the research and for providing an explanation. To prevent research misconduct and manage articles after publication, the Society shall impose no limitation period on the verification of research integrity.
Article 40 (Principles for Verification of Research Integrity)
(1) If the Chairperson requests that the Researcher submit materials for verifying alleged research misconduct in a manuscript submitted to the Journal, the Researcher shall submit those materials to the Chairperson.
(2) The Researcher may request from the Chairperson an opportunity to provide an explanation.
(3) On the basis of the submitted materials, statements, and investigation records, the Chairperson may refer the matter to the Committee for deliberation.
(1) If the Chairperson requests that the Researcher submit materials for verifying alleged research misconduct in a manuscript submitted to the Journal, the Researcher shall submit those materials to the Chairperson.
(2) The Researcher may request from the Chairperson an opportunity to provide an explanation.
(3) On the basis of the submitted materials, statements, and investigation records, the Chairperson may refer the matter to the Committee for deliberation.
Article 41 (Reporting and Receipt of Allegations)
(1) An Informant may report an allegation to the Chairperson orally, in writing, by telephone, by email, or by any other practicable means. Reports shall, in principle, be made under the Informant’s real name. An anonymous report shall be submitted in writing or by email and shall identify the manuscript and provide specific details and evidence of the alleged research misconduct.
(2) An Informant who knew or reasonably should have known that the allegation was false shall not be entitled to protection under these Regulations.
(3) The Committee shall not proceed further in any of the following circumstances:
1. The Respondent or the work concerned cannot be identified.
2. The allegation is clearly false or clearly does not constitute research misconduct.
3. An anonymous report does not provide specific details and evidence of research misconduct.
4. The Informant reports only some of several known allegations concerning the same Respondent and later reports the remainder for the purpose of delaying, repeating, or prolonging the investigation.
(1) An Informant may report an allegation to the Chairperson orally, in writing, by telephone, by email, or by any other practicable means. Reports shall, in principle, be made under the Informant’s real name. An anonymous report shall be submitted in writing or by email and shall identify the manuscript and provide specific details and evidence of the alleged research misconduct.
(2) An Informant who knew or reasonably should have known that the allegation was false shall not be entitled to protection under these Regulations.
(3) The Committee shall not proceed further in any of the following circumstances:
1. The Respondent or the work concerned cannot be identified.
2. The allegation is clearly false or clearly does not constitute research misconduct.
3. An anonymous report does not provide specific details and evidence of research misconduct.
4. The Informant reports only some of several known allegations concerning the same Respondent and later reports the remainder for the purpose of delaying, repeating, or prolonging the investigation.
Article 42 (Protection of Informants)
(1) An “Informant” means a person who reports to the Society facts or evidence indicating research misconduct.
(2) A report shall, in principle, be made under the Informant’s real name orally, in writing, by telephone, by email, or by another method. An anonymous report may be handled in the same manner as a report made under a real name if it is submitted in writing or by email and identifies the manuscript or research project and provides specific details and evidence of the research misconduct.
(3) The President of the Society shall protect an Informant from disadvantage or discrimination in employment or status, Society membership, or the manuscript submission and peer-review process on the ground that the Informant reported research misconduct.
(4) Information identifying an Informant shall not be subject to public disclosure.
(5) If an Informant suffers disadvantage or discrimination under paragraph (3), or if the Informant’s identity is disclosed against the Informant’s wishes, the Society shall bear responsibility for the resulting consequences.
(6) An Informant may request information from the Society concerning the procedures and schedule following the report of research misconduct, and the Society shall respond diligently.
(1) An “Informant” means a person who reports to the Society facts or evidence indicating research misconduct.
(2) A report shall, in principle, be made under the Informant’s real name orally, in writing, by telephone, by email, or by another method. An anonymous report may be handled in the same manner as a report made under a real name if it is submitted in writing or by email and identifies the manuscript or research project and provides specific details and evidence of the research misconduct.
(3) The President of the Society shall protect an Informant from disadvantage or discrimination in employment or status, Society membership, or the manuscript submission and peer-review process on the ground that the Informant reported research misconduct.
(4) Information identifying an Informant shall not be subject to public disclosure.
(5) If an Informant suffers disadvantage or discrimination under paragraph (3), or if the Informant’s identity is disclosed against the Informant’s wishes, the Society shall bear responsibility for the resulting consequences.
(6) An Informant may request information from the Society concerning the procedures and schedule following the report of research misconduct, and the Society shall respond diligently.
Article 43 (Protection of Respondents)
(1) A “Respondent” means a person against whom an allegation of research misconduct is directed on the basis of a report or the Society’s own knowledge, or a person who, during an investigation, is suspected of having participated in the misconduct and becomes subject to the investigation. A witness or other person providing information during the investigation is not a Respondent.
(2) Throughout the verification process, the Committee shall take care not to infringe the reputation or rights of the Respondent.
(3) An allegation of research misconduct shall not be disclosed outside the Society before a Determination is made.
(4) A Respondent may request information from the Committee concerning the procedures and schedule of the research misconduct investigation, and the Committee shall respond diligently.
(1) A “Respondent” means a person against whom an allegation of research misconduct is directed on the basis of a report or the Society’s own knowledge, or a person who, during an investigation, is suspected of having participated in the misconduct and becomes subject to the investigation. A witness or other person providing information during the investigation is not a Respondent.
(2) Throughout the verification process, the Committee shall take care not to infringe the reputation or rights of the Respondent.
(3) An allegation of research misconduct shall not be disclosed outside the Society before a Determination is made.
(4) A Respondent may request information from the Committee concerning the procedures and schedule of the research misconduct investigation, and the Committee shall respond diligently.
Chapter 8: Post-Publication Management
Article 44 (Post-Publication Discussion and Correction)
(1) If an error or omission in a table, figure, text, author name, or other element of an article published in the Journal is identified, the article may be corrected after deliberation by the Committee. If plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, duplicate publication, copyright infringement, misconduct involving coauthorship with a related person, or another violation of research or publication ethics is established, or if an error renders the article’s findings and conclusions unreliable, the article may be retracted.
(2) If an error or mistake is identified in a published article, readers shall be notified through a correction notice, retraction notice, expression of concern by the Editor-in-Chief, or other notice. The notice shall include the full bibliographic information of the article concerned, an explanation of the error or mistake, the correction made, acknowledgment of any person who assisted in identifying the error, and citation information for related notices and the original article.
(3) If a serious violation of research ethics, including plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, duplicate publication, copyright infringement, or misconduct involving a related person, is finally established, the Committee shall decide the type and scope of measures under Article 38 (4). In accordance with the Committee’s decision, the Editor-in-Chief shall implement follow-up measures, including retraction of the article, marking and public notice of the retraction, and notification of relevant organizations.
(4) When retraction of an article or publication of an expression of concern is necessary, the Editor-in-Chief shall follow the relevant guidelines and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts). When correction of an article is necessary, the Editor-in-Chief shall follow the Corrections and Version Control recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) (https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/corrections-and-version-control.html).
(1) If an error or omission in a table, figure, text, author name, or other element of an article published in the Journal is identified, the article may be corrected after deliberation by the Committee. If plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, duplicate publication, copyright infringement, misconduct involving coauthorship with a related person, or another violation of research or publication ethics is established, or if an error renders the article’s findings and conclusions unreliable, the article may be retracted.
(2) If an error or mistake is identified in a published article, readers shall be notified through a correction notice, retraction notice, expression of concern by the Editor-in-Chief, or other notice. The notice shall include the full bibliographic information of the article concerned, an explanation of the error or mistake, the correction made, acknowledgment of any person who assisted in identifying the error, and citation information for related notices and the original article.
(3) If a serious violation of research ethics, including plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, duplicate publication, copyright infringement, or misconduct involving a related person, is finally established, the Committee shall decide the type and scope of measures under Article 38 (4). In accordance with the Committee’s decision, the Editor-in-Chief shall implement follow-up measures, including retraction of the article, marking and public notice of the retraction, and notification of relevant organizations.
(4) When retraction of an article or publication of an expression of concern is necessary, the Editor-in-Chief shall follow the relevant guidelines and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts). When correction of an article is necessary, the Editor-in-Chief shall follow the Corrections and Version Control recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) (https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/corrections-and-version-control.html).
Article 45 (Handling of Post-Publication Complaints and Appeals)
To protect the legitimate rights of authors, reviewers, Editorial Board members, and the Journal, the Society shall handle post-publication complaints and appeals in accordance with the following provisions. Matters not addressed in this Article shall be handled in accordance with COPE guidance on complaints and appeals (https://publicationethics.org/appeals).
1. A manuscript submitter, author, reviewer, or reader may submit a complaint or appeal concerning improper competitive conduct, copyright, data theft, defamation, editorial or peer-review procedures, or legal issues. The complaint or appeal shall include specific facts and supporting evidence addressing who, when, where, what, how, and why.
2. Complaints and appeals concerning editorial or peer-review procedures shall be handled by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board. Matters concerning research misconduct or violations of research or publication ethics shall be referred to the Research Ethics Committee in accordance with Chapters 6 and 7. Legal counsel may participate in decision-making when necessary. If the complaint or appeal concerns the Editor-in-Chief, it shall be handled by a member of the Editorial Board or Research Ethics Committee who has no conflict of interest.
3. The outcome shall be determined according to the nature and seriousness of the conduct at issue. The body or person responsible for handling the matter shall notify the parties of the outcome and the reasons for it.
To protect the legitimate rights of authors, reviewers, Editorial Board members, and the Journal, the Society shall handle post-publication complaints and appeals in accordance with the following provisions. Matters not addressed in this Article shall be handled in accordance with COPE guidance on complaints and appeals (https://publicationethics.org/appeals).
1. A manuscript submitter, author, reviewer, or reader may submit a complaint or appeal concerning improper competitive conduct, copyright, data theft, defamation, editorial or peer-review procedures, or legal issues. The complaint or appeal shall include specific facts and supporting evidence addressing who, when, where, what, how, and why.
2. Complaints and appeals concerning editorial or peer-review procedures shall be handled by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board. Matters concerning research misconduct or violations of research or publication ethics shall be referred to the Research Ethics Committee in accordance with Chapters 6 and 7. Legal counsel may participate in decision-making when necessary. If the complaint or appeal concerns the Editor-in-Chief, it shall be handled by a member of the Editorial Board or Research Ethics Committee who has no conflict of interest.
3. The outcome shall be determined according to the nature and seriousness of the conduct at issue. The body or person responsible for handling the matter shall notify the parties of the outcome and the reasons for it.
Supplementary Provisions
1. These Regulations may be amended following deliberation by the Executive Board of the Society.
2. Any matter not provided for in these Regulations shall be determined by the Executive Board of the Society.
2. Any matter not provided for in these Regulations shall be determined by the Executive Board of the Society.