Chapter 1 General Provision
Article 1 (Purpose): The purpose of the Editorial Policy of S/N Korean Humanities (hereafter S/N), the English-language Korean studies journal published by Institute of the Humanities for Unification at Konkuk University (IHU), is to secure the veracity of research articles (hereafter articles) published in S/N.
Article 2 (Scope of Application): The Editorial Policy of S/N applies to those who submit their articles to S/N and those who peer-review them for publication.
Article 3 (Scope of Research Misconduct): "Research misconduct"
includes practices of forgery, unauthorized alteration, plagiarism, wrongful
indication of author, etc., as explained below.
1. "Forgery" means falsely producing research data and results that do not really exist.
2. "Unauthorized alteration" means distorting research contents and results by intentionally manipulating, altering or deleting existing research data and results.
3. "Plagiarism" means two things: 1) using another person or institution's idea, content, research result, etc., without appropriate citations, and 2) reusing significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of one's own work without acknowledging that one is doing so or without citing the original work.
4. "Wrongful indication of author" means failing to grant authorship to a person who contributed to the research or granting authorship to a person who made no contribution to the research.
Chapter 2 Research Ethics Committee
Article 4 (Purpose): The purpose of Research Ethics Committee (hereafter, Committee) is to investigate research misconduct and, if necessary, impose appropriate sanctions.
Article 5 (Composition):
1. The Committee will consist of the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, and three Editorial Board Members appointed by the Editor-in-Chief.
2. The Editor-in-Chief will be the chairperson of the Committee.
3. No person directly involved in or related to the alleged research misconduct may be a Committee Member.
Article 6 (Investigations):
1. The chairperson of the Research Ethics Committee shall notify both the accuser and the accused of the investigation plan. The investigation will be carried out within six months of the date that both parties were informed of the plan, with the written results delivered to all involved or interested parties. If the chairperson deems that the investigation cannot be effectively completed within six months, the chairperson may extend the investigation period by up to two months by notifying both parties of the extension and providing a reasonable explanation for the extension.
2. The written results of the investigation must include the following.
a. Content of information reported
b. Research misconduct subject to investigation
c. List of Research Ethics Committee Members and minutes of all meetings of Research Ethics Committee
d. Determination of whether the research misconduct actually occurred
e. Evidence or witnesses of research misconduct
3. During the investigation, the Research Ethics Committee shall provide both the accuser and the accused with the opportunity to present their opinions on the matter.
Article 7 (Decisions and Sanctions of the Research Ethics Committee):
1. All determinations and sanctions related to research misconduct will be resolved by concurrence of the majority of Research Ethics Committee Members. The publisher or Editor-in-Chief shall act in accordance with the decisions of the Research Ethics Committee.
2. If the author of a manuscript is determined to have committed research misconduct, any one or more of the following sanctions may be applied.
a. Cancellation of publication of the manuscript
b. Public announcement or notice to relevant agencies of cancellation of publication of the manuscript, including the name of author, title of article, volume of the S/N issue to have contained the article, date of cancellation, cause for cancellation, etc.)
c. Prohibition of submission of articles by the author for up to three years after the decision
Article 8 (Protection of Rights and Confidentiality):
1. Prior to the disclosure of the final results of the investigation, the Research Ethics Committee shall not directly or indirectly disclose the identity of the accuser, nor shall they infringe in any way upon the rights or reputation of the accused.
2. The Research Ethics Committee shall keep all pertinent material related to the investigation confidential, including (but not limited to) the original report, investigation, decision, sanctions, and resolution.
3. No person directly or indirectly involved in the research misconduct investigation may disclose information related to the investigation to any outside party. If there is a reasonable ground for such disclosure, the information may be disclosed only with the written approval from the Research Ethics Committee.
Article 9 (Challenge and Recusal):
1. If either the accuser or the accused believes that the investigation is compromised by the involvement of one or more Research Ethics Committee Members, that person may challenge the investigation by presenting her or his reasons to the chairperson of the Research Ethics Committee. If the chairperson decides that the challenge is valid, the chairperson may replace the Research Ethics Committee Member.
2. The chairperson may replace any Research Ethics Committee Member who asks to be removed from the committee for reasons of fairness.
Article 10 (Appeal):
1. If either the accuser or the accused disagrees with the result of the investigation or the decision of the Research Ethics Committee, that person may file an appeal to the chairperson of the Research Ethics Committee within one month of the date of the notification of the final results of the investigation. The chairperson shall then review the appeal and submit the final written decision to both the accuser and the accused within two months of the date of receiving the appeal.
2. If the Chairperson of the Research Ethics Committee determines that the appeal is valid, the chairperson may repeat the investigation procedure.
[Updated as of September 15, 2020]