Home > 학회지 > Ethical Policy
Ethical Principles of the Korean Society of Neurocognitive Rehabilitation
1. Ethics of researchers
※ Researchers who have committed a dishonest act such as those described below are restricted from publishing their papers in the Journal of Korean Society of Neurocognitive Rehabilitation.
(1) Forgery: An act in which a researcher forges nonexistent data or research results.
(2) Falsification: An act in which a researcher manipulates research-related materials, apparatuses, or processes, and modifies or omits data or research results to make them differ from the actual results.
(3) Plagiarism: An act in which a researcher uses the ideas, processes, results, or materials of other researchers without quoting them or obtaining their permission.
(4) False entry of a researcher in a paper: An act in which a researcher who did not directly contribute to the research is included as an author of the paper, or in which a researcher who directly contributed to the research is omitted as an author.
(5) Dual publication: An act in which a researcher publishes the same paper in more than two different journals or publications.
(6) Wrongful use of research materials: An act in which a researcher uses research materials without approval of the person or institute that owns the rights for the materials.
(7) False public statement
① An act in which a researcher falsifies their educational background, career, qualifications, research achievements, research results, and so on in a paper submitted to the Journal of Korean Society of Neurocognitive Rehabilitation.
② When a researcher submits a paper for which they summarized, modified, or complemented their dissertation, journal paper, or research report, it is not regarded as a dual publication
③ When it is deemed necessary to judge an act that is not described above, the editing committee will investigate and decide on the matter.
2. Measures of dishonest acts in research
① When the chief of the editing committee is aware of or has been reported about a dishonest act, the chief should summon the editing committee to examine and make a judgment regarding the matter.
② When the editing committee concludes that a researcher has acted dishonestly, the chief should execute the following measures in whole or in part according to the importance of the matter.
- Deletion of the paper at issue from the journal (KCI, the homepage of the Korean Society of Occupational Therapy, and other references)
- Prohibition of submitting future papers of the researcher(s) involved (for at least more than three years)
- Announcement of the case on the homepage of the Korean Society of Occupational Therapy
- Cautionary remarks and a disciplinary warning
3. Protection of the rights of an informant of a dishonest act
① An informant can notify that a dishonest act has occurred in any way possible, and should do so using their real name (Even if a person reports the detailed content and evidence regarding a dishonest act anonymously, it should be conducted in accordance with the rules of someone using their real name).
② The editing committee should protect the informant from being disadvantaged based on his/her report, and keep their identity secret so as to protect the informant from disclosure to any outside parties.
③ The informant can ask the editing committee to let him/her know about the process and the schedule of the investigation after reporting of a dishonest act. The editing committee should respond to such a request with sincerity.
4. Protection of the right of the person under investigation
① The editing committee should be careful not to violate the honor and rights of the person under investigation, and until the final judgment of the dishonest act is determined, the editing committee should not expose the suspected content or the identity of the suspected person to any outside parties.
② The editing committee should provide a person under investigation with a chance to explain the situation.
5. Ethics of the editing committee members and reviewers
① The editing committee members and reviewers should conduct the reception and review of the papers fairly, without allowing their personal interests to bias the results.
② The editing committee members and reviewers should not expose to any outside parties what information they found during the reception and review of the papers in question.
③ The editing committee members and reviewers should examine the papers with accurate knowledge regarding their content.
④ If the editing committee members and reviewers violate the duties of ① and ②, they should respond cooperatively to the investigation conducted based on their violation.
These principles have been in place since December 8th, 2009.