Ethics Standards

연구윤리규정

Enactment: July 21, 2007
1^st Revision: April 11, 2009
2^nd Revision: March 25, 2017
3^rd Revision: September 8, 2018
4^th Revision: July 16, 2020

Chapter 1 General Provisions

Article 1: The committee is called Research Ethics Committee of The Korea Association of Foreign Languages Education (herein referred to as “ Research Ethics Committee”).

Article 2: The committee was established within the association in accordance with Article 29 of The Korea Association of Foreign Languages Education.

Article 3: These regulations apply to all members of The Korea Association of Foreign Languages Education. Furthermore these regulations apply to new members at the time of registration.

Chapter 2 Research Ethics

Article 1 (Obligations of the Members)
Members of The Korea Association of Foreign Languages Education observe the norms as researchers, contribute to academic and social development through academic research, and fulfill their responsibility as researchers.
1. Members of the Korean Association for Foreign Language Education are deemed to have pledged to comply with the research ethics regulations when the research ethics regulations of this association come into effect.
2. All researchers who submit a manuscript to the journal of this association shall read the Research Ethics Regulations and sign the "Research Ethics Regulations Compliance Pledge" before submitting the thesis.
3. When institutional approval is required for conducting research, the member(s) will provide accurate information about the research plan and obtain approval before conducting the research. In addition, research must be faithfully carried out according to the approved research plan. It is recommended that a confirmation from the IRB (Institutional Review Board) be submitted for any manuscript that has received research funding from research institutes.

Article 2 (Prohibition of Research Misconduct)
“Research misconduct” includes plagiarism, forgery, alteration, improper removal/addition of manuscript authors, and duplicate use of data in the study process and/or study results conducted by the researcher. Below, the definition of each type of misconduct is as follows <Guidelines for securing research ethics by the Ministry of Education of Korea (revised on November 3, 2015)>.
1. Plagiarism: to use ideas, research content, or outcomes of others without valid approval or quotation.
① An act of using all or part of the research content of another person's work without revealing the source
② An act of not revealing the source while partially altering the words or sentence structure of another's work
③ The act of not indicating the source while using the original thoughts and expressions of others
④ An act of not indicating the source while translating and using the work of others
2. Appropriation: Even if the source of the cited original work is disclosed, the contents and arguments of said cite work do not support the work of the researcher and become the main focus of the researcher’s output.
3. Indirect plagiarism: Even if the source of the cited original work is disclosed, there is no original content, and the claims and contents of the previous study are repeated.
4. Self-plagiarism: In the case of citing and using the research results published by the person submitting the thesis without specifying the source
5. Falsification: The act of creating false research results by manipulating data that does not exist in the results of experiments and analysis
6. Modification: The act of altering research content or results by artificially manipulating research materials, laboratory equipment, research analysis processes, etc., or by arbitrarily modifying or deleting research results.
7. Improper removal/addition of manuscript authors: The act of not granting the author qualification to a researcher who has contributed to the content or results of the research without justifiable reason or granting the author qualification to a person who has no academic contribution at all.
8. Duplicate use of resources: Use of previously published resources or research results without citation from sources, or double publication without prior consent of the association

Article 3 (Author Indication)
1. Achievements recognition: The person designated as the author is fully responsible for the manuscript, and in the case of a co-authors, all authors are jointly responsible for the manuscript.
2. Author(s) order: In the case of a manuscript with multiple authors or translators, the order in which the authors or translators are written depends in principle on the degree to which they have contributed to the study regardless of their relative status.
3. Author’s affiliation and position: The author(s) shall clearly disclose their affiliations and positions.

Article 4 (Multiple Submissions or Publications)
1. Prohibition of duplicate submission: The authors(s) shall not be allowed to submit a manuscript to more than one association at the same time.
2. Duplicate publication: The manuscript published in 『Foreign Languages Education』 shall not be duplicated elsewhere. However, it may be published elsewhere with the prior consent of the Editorial Board but must be stated as follows at the bottom of the first page of the duplicated manuscript: “This study was published on pages 0-000 of 『Foreign Languages Education』 Vol. 00, No. 00, P.0-000 and published in the original text (or ‘by revising and supplementing the original text’) with the prior consent of The Korean Association of Foreign Language Education.” In principle, papers published elsewhere cannot be duplicated in the journal 『Foreign Languages Education』. If the manuscript is an abbreviated dissertation or part of a dissertation, or if a dissertation presented at an academic conference is revised and published, this should be specified.

Article 5 (Research Ethics for Human Subjects)
1. Research on human subjects or research including a research method on human subjects shall comply with socially and ethically permissible standards. Researchers must take care not to act nuethically during the research process and outcome processing.
2. Researchers shall fully explain to a participant the research procedures and be specific about experiment procedures if the research requires said experiments. Researchers shall must also explain to a participant in detail about any concerns or risks which may occur during said experiment as a result of their participation in the research.
3. In the case of research that requires an experiment, the experimental procedure will also be described in detail.
4. Researchers shall give an opportunity for participants to ask questions about the research procedures, if they have any.
5. Researchers shall advise participants that they may withdraw their consent of participation in the research at any time and may discontinue their participation, even during the research.
6. Researchers shall avoid distorting the direction and outcomes of research with the use of money and other incentives as compensation for participants.

Article 6 (Ethics Regulations for Editing)
1. Objectivity of the Editorial Board: The editorial board treats the manuscript submitted for publication in an academic journal fairly based on the quality level of the manuscript and the submission rules, regardless of any preconceived notions or personal relationship with the author's gender, age, organization, etc.
2. Selection of reviewers: The editorial board requires that reviewers have professional knowledge and can demonstrate fair judgment in the relevant field to evaluate the submitted manuscript.
3. Non-disclosure of author information: The editorial board shall not disclose information about the author or the contents of the manuscript to anyone other than the reviewers until it is decided whether to publish the submitted manuscript.
4. Cooperation with Research Ethics Committee: When a question arises related to research misconduct, the Editorial Board promptly informs the Ethics Committee and seeks an appropriate course of action.

Article 7 (Ethics Regulations for the Evaluation of Research Outcomes)
1. Obligations of the reviewer: Reviewers faithfully review the manuscripts requested by the editorial board according to the review regulations set by the association and notify the editor-in-chief if of the result. If it is judged that he/she is not the right person to review the submitted manuscript, he/she shall notify the editorial board of this fact within 2-3 days.
2. Fairness of the review: The reviewers evaluate the manuscript fairly based on objective criteria, regardless of personal academic beliefs or personal relationship with the author.
3. Notification of research misconduct: When the reviewer has already published the manuscript requested for review in another journal or finds a problem related to research misconduct, the reviewers immediately notify the editorial board of this fact.
4. Disclosure of manuscript content and review results: The reviewers will not disclose the details of the manuscript subject being reviewed to others. In addition, before the journal in which the manuscript has been accepted is published, the contents of the manuscript must not be cited nor the review results disclosed without the consent of the author.

Chapter 3 Research Ethics Committee

Article 1 (Organization): The Research Ethics Committee (herein referred to as Committee) shall also serve as the role of the Editorial Board.

Article 2 (Tasks): The committee manages ethical issues related to academic research and publication. To this end, they also, deliberate and decide on member(s)’ actions that violate these regulations.

Article 3 (Request for Deliberation): Members or interested parties may request a written response from the Committee on whether or not a specific member's writings violate the association's research ethics regulations. When the above request is received, the chairperson reports it to the president and promptly convenes the committee.

Article 4 (Meeting): The meeting is convened by the editor-in-chief, who then takes the role of chairperson of the beforementioned meeting. The chairperson convenes the committee when there is a request for the president or three or more members, or when a member requests deliberation. The meeting is held with a majority attendance of the enrolled members, and decisions are made with the approval of a majority of the attending members. In principle, the contents and minutes of the committee's meetings are not disclosed.

Article 5 (Deliberation Procedure)
1. The committee decides whether there has been a violation of research ethics after sufficient review of the research results of the members to be considered. To this end, the committee may interview the member subject to deliberation, the deliberation requester, and the reviewers of the dissertation in question, if necessary. If the member under review does not cooperate with the interview by the committee, it may be considered a violation of the code of ethics.
2. The committee shall give sufficient opportunity for clarification to members who have been reported and judged as violating the code of ethics.
3. Members shall not disclose the identity of the member subject to deliberation publicly until a final disciplinary decision has been made by the society for violation of the research ethics regulations.
4. The committee prepares the entire deliberation process in writing, and the deliberation decision is ratified with the signatures of all deliberation members.

Article 6 (Report of review result)
The committee shall report the results of any investigation of violations of the research ethics regulations to the executive board, including the following matters.
1) Violation of Research Ethics Regulations
2) Review procedure
3) Foundation and evidence of the review decision
4) Explanation resources by the researcher in question
5) Other necessary evidence

Article 7 (Disciplinary Procedure): In the event of a disciplinary suggestion by the committee, the chairman convenes the standing board of directors to make a final decision on disciplinary action and disciplinary content. Disciplinary action, such as a warning, suspension of membership, and an apology to open the association, can be taken, and this action can be communicated to other organizations or individuals.

Article 8 (Disciplinary level): Disciplinary action, such as a warning, suspension of membership, an apology for public disclosure, etc., can be applied and this action can be communicated to other organizations or individuals. In the event any research misconduct outlined in Chapter 2 is revealed, even after the “publication acceptance” is determined or even if the manuscript has been published, the publication will be withdrawn according to the resolution of the Ethics Committee, and any manuscript submission will be denied for the next three years.

Chapter 4 Other

Article 1 (Revision of Research Ethics Regulations): The revision procedure of the ethics regulations follows the revision procedures of the Editorial Board of this society.

Article 2 (Compliance with Revised Regulations): If the research ethics regulations are revised, members of these society are deemed to have pledged to comply with the new regulations without a separate pledge procedure.

Article 3 (Matters Not Covered Above): Matters not specified in this regulations shall be implemented according to the decision of the executive board of the society.