Research Ethics Regulations

Enacted: March 1, 2006
Revised: January 19, 2007
Revised: March 5, 2012
Revised: March 13, 2020

Chapter 1. General Rules

Article 1. (Purpose)
This regulation aims to present research ethics and integrity to be observed by setting the standards and disciplinary actions for research misconduct in the publications of the Journal of Korean Society of ITS and the results from research services conducted by the Korean Society of Intelligent Transport Systems(hereafter, referred to as “Institute”).

Article 2. (Research Ethics Committee)
If a misconduct problem is raised with respect to the papers of this Institute, the research ethics committee is formed and held when necessary to deliberate and decide on the matters set forth in these regulations. The president of the Institute designates one of the vice presidents as the chairman of the research ethics committee, and the chairman of the research ethics committee convenes and chairs the research ethics committee. The research ethics committee chairman appoints up to 5 members including the editor-in-chief and experts in related fields as members of the research ethics committee. However, authors and research personnel of papers that are subject to deliberation can not become members od the committee.

Chapter 2. (Research Misconduct)

Article 3. (Forgery and falsification)
Forgery and falsification encompasses the following acts of intentionally expressing figures, photos, etc. of data or results used in research omething different from the truth.
1) Forgery refers to the act of falsely making non-existent data or research results.
2) Falsification refers to the act of distorting research contents or results by artificially manipulating research process or modifying data.

Article 4. (Plagiarism)
1) Plagiarism refers to the act of deliberately describing academic ideas, opinions, expressions, research results, etc. that has already been published through all textual media such as domestic and foreign academic journals, papers presented at academic conferences, research reports, master's and doctoral dissertations, books, magazines, and internet, etc. without proper citation.
2) Plagiarism is also applied when the researcher is the same as the author of an already published thesis or research report (self-plagiarism).
3) However, academic knowledges or research results that have already been universalized and used in academia are not regarded as plagiarism even if they are described without citation.

Article 5. (Simultaneous Submission)
Submitted papers can not be simultaneously submitted to other academic journals such as Korea Citation Index(KCI), candidate journals of KCI or overseas academic journals.

Article 6. (Duplicate Publication)
1) Duplicate publication refers to an academic act of using the same or similar academic works or previous research results in another academic journals without the permission of the editor of the first published journal or the copyright holders and citing sources.
2) ① Papers published in domestic or foreign academic journals can not be duplicated.
② Differences from the existing papers are judged based on the following criteria. a. In terms of research purpose, method, scope, data, results, and logic development method, at least 2 or more items must be significantly different from existing papers.
b. Use of another language is not acknowledged as distinction. 3) It must be clearly stated clearly stated when the papers presented at academic conferences, etc. is submitted with modifications and supplements.
4) It must be clearly stated when the research report or a part of it is submitted with modifications and supplements.
5) The author of the degree thesis must be included when a doctoral or master's thesis is submitted with modifications and supplements.

Article 7. (Resubmission)
Manuscripts that have been rejected for publication by this Institute can not be resubmitted.

Article 8. (Author’s Qualifications)
In order to become an author of this Institute journal, all of the following conditions must be satisfied.
1) Substantial contributions in the idea of research and the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data.
2) Write or revise a paper about the important intellectual content of the research.
3) Final approval of the final version of the paper to be published.
4) Agree to take responsibility for all aspects of the research so that any issues related to accuracy or integrity in any part of the research can be properly investigated and resolved.

Chapter 3. (Editorial Board Regulations)

Editors must comply with this research ethics regulations, and cooperate with reviewers and other editors to review and judge for submitted papers.

Article 9. (Editorial Board Responsibilities)
The editorial board takes full responsibility for determining whether or not to publish submitted papers, and must respect the author's personality and independence as a scholar.

Article 10. (Handling of papers)
The editorial board must treat papers submitted for publication fairly based on the quality of the paper and the submission regulations: regardless of the author's gender, age, affiliated institution, any prejudice or personal acquaintance.

Article 11. (Examination request)
The editorial board should request the evaluation of the submitted paper to reviewers with professional knowledge and fair judgment in the relevant field after excluding reviewers belonging to the same institution. When requesting a review, try to make an objective evaluation as much as possible by avoiding reviewers who are too close to the authors or too hostile. However, if an objection is raised by the authors, a third-party expert in the field may be consulted.

Article 12. (Private)
The editorial board should not disclose information about the authors or the contents of the paper to anyone other than the reviewers until the publication is decided.

Chapter 4. Reviewer’s Regulations

Reviewers must observe the research ethics regulations and provide the advice related to the publication of paper to the editors.

Article 13. (Review)
Reviewers must faithfully review the papers requested by the editorial board (committee) of the journal within the period set by review regulations and notify the review results to editorial board(committee). If it is judged that he or she is not the right person to review the paper then notify the fact to the editorial board(committee) without delay.

Article 14. (Review Principles)
Reviewers must fairly evaluate the paper based on objective standards: regardless of personal academic beliefs or personal relationships with the authors. Papers should not be rejected without providing sufficient evidence, conflict with the reviewer's own point of view and interpretation but also the papers should not be evaluated without reading them properly.

Article 15. (Review Result Description)
Reviewers must respect the personality and independence of authors as professional intellectuals. For areas that require supplementation, the reason for this should be explained in detail. Use polite and soft expressions as much as possible and refrain from demeaning or insulting expressions to the authors.

Article 16. (Confidentiality)
Reviewers must keep the confidentiality of the paper to be reviewed. It is not advisable to show the paper to others or discuss the contents of the paper with others unless you are specifically seeking advice for paper evaluation. In addition, the contents of the paper must not be cited without the consent of the authors before the paper is published.

Chapter 5. (Review and Resolution Process)

Article 17. (Judgement of Research Misconduct)
1) If there is a report on research misconduct, the editor-in-chief should collect the relevant data and verify the credibility of the report.
2) When the editor-in-chief confirms the credibility of the report, it is presented as an agenda item to the research ethics committee and submitted for deliberation.
3) The chairman of the research ethics committee gives an opportunity to the researchers explain in documents about the proposed agenda prior to deliberation.
4) The research ethics committee determines whether there is research misconduct with the consent of more than 2/3 of the members present and voting agreement by more than 2/3 of the members present, and then the period of suspension of paper submission is decided.
5) The president of the Institute notifies the details of the research ethics committee's decision and the reason for it to the researches.
6) The research ethics committee deliberates and decides within 3 months after recognizing the misconduct occurrence.

Article 18. (Appeal)
1) A researcher judged guilty of research misconduct whom believes that the research ethics committee's resolution is unreasonable, he or she may raise an appeal only once within 1 month from the date of notification in documents.
2) The research ethics committee may review the validity of the appeal and reconfirm or revise the decision.
3) The president of the Institute notifies the decision of the research ethics committee to the researchers.
4) Reconfirm and amend the deliberation decision within 3 months after raising an appeal to the research ethics committee.

Article 19. (Confidentiality)
1) The identity of the person who reported research misconduct must not be disclosed to the public.
2) The identity of the researchers should not be disclosed to the public before the final judgment is made for research misconduct or when it is judged not to be a research misconduct.

Chapter 6. (Penalty)

Article 20. (Penalty)
1) If the research ethics committee determines that it is forgery, falsification, plagiarism, or duplicate publication, the following measures will be taken. ① In the case of journal paper, the editorial board cancels the publication of the paper and then announces it on the Institute website.
② In the case of duplicate publication, the decision is notified to the Institute and the authors can not submit the paper for 5 years from the time of the final decision.
③ In the case of research reports, the research ethics committee determines sanctions separately depending on the severity of the issue. 2) If the research ethics committee determines that the paper is submitted simultaneously and resubmitted, the following measures will be taken. ① The editorial board suspends the paper reviewing process.
② In the case of simultaneous paper submission, the decision is notified to the Institute and the authors can not submit the paper for 2 years from the time of the final decision.

Supplementary Provisions

Article 1. (Alteration and Abolitions of Regulation)
This regulation can be altered and abolished by the resolution of the board of directors.

Article 2. (Effective Date)
This regulation is effective from the date of enactment.