Research Ethics Policy for Journal of Multi-Cultural Contents Studies

Issue date: January 5^th, 2009
Revised date: November 1^st, 2013

Section 1. Objectives

These guidelines are intended to prevent research misconduct of authors and to define and observe the research ethics in the publication of Journal of Multi-Cultural Contents Studies.

Section 2. Ethical guidelines for authors

1. Article 1. (Plagiarism) Authors submitting to Journal of Multi-Cultural Contents Studies must warrant that their manuscript does not contain presentation of research or opinion of another person as their own. All results of research conducted by another person or entity must be cited with the source. Although it is acceptable to include references several times, it is considered plagiarism when a portion of the source is falsely presented as one’s own finding.
2. Article 2. (Authorship)
   1. 1. Authors are held accountable and acknowledged only for the research they actually conducted or contributed to.
   2. 2. The order of authors (or translators) must accurately reflect the level of contribution to the research regardless of their relative status or position. One cannot be entitled as the first author merely due to one’s position. Also, one must not submit a co-authored research article as one’s individual work. Minor contributions to the research or article should be appropriately indicated either in a footnote, introduction, or acknowledgements.
3. Article 3. (Previously published work) Authors must not submit or try to publish work previously published by the author in Korea or overseas as new research. Authors must declare that the submitted manuscript is not a duplicate of a previously published work and is not plagiarized by submitting the Research Ethics Agreement form with the manuscript.
4. Article 4. (Citations and references) Authors must cite and reference publications and ideas by another person or entity in footnotes, thereby informing readers what is part of existing literature and what is the author’s original idea, opinion, and interpretation.
5. Article 5. (Revision of manuscript) Authors should accommodate the comments of the editors and reviewers and revise the article accordingly. If the author disagrees with the reviewed comments, the author should notify the editorial committee of the rationale.

Section 3. Ethical guidelines for editors

1. Article 6. (Editors’ responsibilities and obligations) Editors are responsible for the decisions to accept or reject a manuscript. Editors must respect the authors’ individuality as an independent scholar.
2. Article 7. (Basic principles for editors) Editors must give unbiased consideration to each manuscript solely based on the manuscript’s merit and the submission guidelines, without regard to sex, age, institutional affiliation of the author(s), or personal relationship with the author(s) and without any prejudice against the author(s).
3. Article 8. (Principles for the selection of peer reviewers) Editors must request the evaluation and review of the submitted manuscript to experts in the relevant field who has the ability to make unbiased judgment. Editors must ensure the reviewers do not receive the authors’ personal data by not disclosing the authors’ identities to the reviewers, thereby assuring the best possible objectivity in the review process.

Section 4. Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers

1. Article 9. (Meeting the evaluation deadline) Reviewers should provide a constructive evaluation report of the submitted manuscript to the journal’s editorial committee within the set deadline. If a reviewer has a conflict of interest and deems unsuitable to review the manuscript, the reviewer should notify this immediately to the editorial committee.
2. Article 10. (Basic principles for evaluation) Reviewers must give unbiased evaluation of the submitted manuscript without regard to the reviewer’s personal academic principle or relationship with the author(s). Reviewers must not reject the manuscript on insufficient grounds or from conflict of the reviewer’s point of view or interpretation with those of the author(s). Reviewers must not review the manuscript without properly reading the submitted manuscript.
3. Article 11. (Guarantee of author’s individuality) Reviewers must respect the author’s individuality as an independent scholar with expert knowledge in the field. Reviewers may indicate their judgment in the review report, and should give detailed reasons and explanation for comments suggesting revisions by the author. Reviewers should use courteous and moderate expressions in their reports and must avoid making statements that disparage or disrespect the author(s).
4. Article 12. (Guarantee of author’s anonymity) Reviewers must keep the review process of the submitted manuscript confidential. Unless it is essential for the review process to seek external advice, the manuscript must not be shared or discussed with anyone outside the peer review process.

Section 5. Application of ethics policy

1. Article 13. (Ethics Agreement) Editors and peer reviewers of Journal of Multi-Cultural Contents Studies are expected to adhere to the ethical guidelines upon appointment. Authors are expected to adhere to the ethical guidelines upon submission of manuscript.
2. Article 14. (Report of breach of ethics guidelines and guarantee of confidentiality) Where a breach of ethics policy is found or suspected, this should be reported to the research ethics committee. The ethics committee must not externally disclose the identity of the person undergoing investigation until the institute decides what disciplinary action will be taken.
3. Article 15. (Rights of ethics committee) The ethics committee has the right to conduct extensive investigation of the allegations through communication with the complainant, the respondent, and witnesses and through supporting evidences. Where facts of breaches of ethics guidelines are established, the ethics committee has the right to suggest the appropriate disciplinary action to the Executive Director of Institute.
4. Article 16. (Investigation and review by the ethics committee) The person suspected of breaching the ethics guidelines must cooperate with the investigation conducted by the ethics committee. Refusing to cooperate with the investigation is itself considered a breach of the ethics guidelines.
5. Article 17. (Respondent’s notice and guarantee of appeal) The person suspected of breaching the ethics guidelines has the right to appeal to the committee’s disciplinary decision and must be given sufficient opportunity to set out the arguments. The ethics committee must appropriately guarantee that the appellant will be given the opportunity to defend oneself and present one’s arguments.
6. Article 18. (Disciplinary procedure) Where the ethics committee proposes a disciplinary action, the Executive Director of institute convenes an editorial committee and finalizes the disciplinary decision and actions. A manuscript judged to have breached the ethics guidelines will be rejected in the first screening. A published article will be deleted from the journal’s database and will notify this to relevant academic institutions. Authors who breached the research ethics will be restricted from submission for the ensuing 5 years.

Supplements

1. 1. The above policy applies from January 5^th, 2009.
2. 2. The above policy is revised and applies from November 1^st, 2013.