Research Ethics Regulations of the Art History Association of Korea

Enacted: April 1, 2008
1st Revision: July 16, 2014
2nd Revision: April 15, 2018
3rd Revision: April 13, 2024

Article 1 (Purpose)

The purpose of these Research Ethics Regulations is to establish research ethics for researchers involved in academic presentations and the Korean Journal of Art History (hereinafter referred to as 'the Journal') of the Art History Association of Korea (hereinafter referred to as 'the Association'), to prevent research misconduct, and to set forth the principles and standards necessary for fair verification of integrity in the event of research misconduct.

Article 2 (Researcher Ethics)

1. Researchers who present at the Association's academic events or submit papers to the Journal must be aware of these regulations and only present or submit research outcomes that ensure research integrity.
2. When citing publicly available academic materials, researchers must provide accurate information and clearly indicate the source.
3. Materials obtained through personal channels may only be cited after obtaining definitive consent from the information provider.
4. Researchers bear full responsibility for their published research results.
5. Researchers shall not simultaneously submit research papers submitted to this Association to other institutions.

Article 3 (Editorial Board Ethics)

1. Editorial board members of the Journal must handle all submitted papers objectively and fairly, taking special care to avoid disputes regarding fairness among authors, reviewers, and Association members.
2. Editorial board members must not disclose the entire review process and its results to outside parties under any circumstances.
3. When editorial board members discover issues related to research ethics while performing their duties, they must immediately notify the Research Ethics Committee.

Article 4 (Reviewer Ethics)

1. Journal reviewers must conduct sincere and fair reviews of commissioned papers based on scholarly conscience and objective academic standards.
2. Reviewers may not render a 'rejection' decision on a submitted paper without providing sufficient grounds, merely because their personal academic views conflict with those of the author.
3. Reviewers must not disclose or privately use the contents of reviewed papers until they are published in the Journal.
4. Reviewers must respect the dignity of authors in the language used in their review reports.

Article 5 (Scope of Research Misconduct)

Research misconduct refers to the following acts as defined in accordance with Article 12 (Scope of Research Misconduct) of the Guidelines for Securing Research Ethics (Ministry of Education Directive No. 153):

1. "Fabrication" refers to the act of falsely creating non-existent data or research results.
2. "Falsification" refers to the act of distorting research content or results by artificially manipulating research content or arbitrarily altering or deleting data.
3. "Plagiarism" refers to the act of misappropriating another person's ideas, research content/results, or analyzed data without proper authorization or accurate source attribution, causing third parties to perceive them as one's own creation; or using the same content from one's previously published paper in another paper without citing the source; or translating and using it in another language.
4. "Improper authorship attribution" refers to the act of not granting authorship to a person who has made contributions to research content or results without justifiable reason, or granting authorship to a person who has made no contribution.
5. "Improper duplicate publication" refers to the act of a researcher publishing a work identical or substantially similar to their previous research results without source attribution and claiming it as a separate research achievement.
6. "Obstruction of investigation into research misconduct" refers to the act of intentionally obstructing investigations into suspected misconduct by oneself or others, or causing harm to whistleblowers.
7. Other acts that seriously deviate from the range commonly accepted in each academic field.

Article 6 (Receipt of Reports of Research Misconduct)

When research misconduct is suspected in relation to academic presentations or papers published in the Journal, anyone may file a written report to the Association specifying the subject and reasons, and request an investigation.

Article 7 (Establishment and Composition of the Research Ethics Committee)

1. When a report of research misconduct is received pursuant to Article 6, the Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as 'the Committee') shall be established immediately.
2. The Committee shall consist of five or more members, including the chairperson.
3. Committee members shall in principle be regular members of the Association, recommended by the Board of Directors and appointed by the President. However, experts from other fields may also be appointed as ethics committee members as operationally necessary, and persons who may influence the progress of deliberations shall be excluded from appointment.
4. The chairperson shall be elected by the Committee members.

Article 8 (Functions of the Research Ethics Committee)

1. The Committee shall commence investigation upon receipt of reports of research misconduct, securing sufficient evidence.
2. The Committee shall deliberate and determine whether misconduct occurred based on the investigation results, and decide the scope of sanctions against the person under investigation.

Article 9 (Deliberation Period)

1. Deliberation shall commence within 15 days of receipt of the report and be completed within 30 days of the start of deliberation.
2. In unavoidable circumstances, the deliberation period may be extended by Committee resolution, but deliberation must be completed within 3 months of the initial report date.

Article 10 (Protection of Rights of Whistleblowers and Persons Under Investigation)

1. The Committee shall protect the identities of whistleblowers and persons under investigation, and shall not disclose the whistleblower's name without their consent unless absolutely necessary.
2. The Committee shall not disclose the contents of reports to outside parties until a final verdict on misconduct is reached.
3. The Committee shall provide equal rights and opportunities for testimony, objection, and defense to both whistleblowers and persons under investigation.
4. If the person under investigation is found innocent, efforts shall be made to restore their reputation.

Article 11 (Opportunity for Explanation)

The person under investigation shall be given sufficient opportunity to explain, and the method of explanation may be public or private according to the party's preference.

Article 12 (Judgment and Sanctions)

1. The chairperson shall notify the whistleblower and the person under investigation of the resolution and its reasons in writing within 10 days of the judgment date.
2. The following sanctions shall be imposed on paper authors found to have committed research misconduct:
   1. Cancellation of Journal publication and deletion of the paper from online databases.
   2. Prohibition from submitting to the Journal for 5 years from the judgment date.
   3. Posting of the facts and measures on the Association's website and in the Journal.
   4. If the judged paper was written with research funding support, notification of details to the relevant research funding agency.
3. If duplicate submission of a research paper is discovered, submission shall be prohibited for 5 years.

Article 13 (Appeal and Re-deliberation)

1. If the whistleblower or person under investigation objects to the Committee's judgment, they may file a written appeal with reasons to the Committee within 30 days of being notified of the result.
2. The Committee shall decide whether to conduct re-deliberation within 10 days of receiving the appeal.
3. If re-deliberation is decided, the Committee must complete re-deliberation within 60 days of receiving the appeal.

Article 14 (Detailed Rules)

Matters not specified in these regulations shall follow general practices. If matters not stated in these regulations but generally suspected of violating research ethics arise, the Research Ethics Committee shall be convened at the request of the chairperson to make a decision.

Addendum

1. These regulations were enacted on April 1, 2008.
2. Amendments to the regulations shall be made by resolution of the Board of Directors.
3. These regulations shall take effect from July 17, 2014.
4. These regulations shall take effect from April 15, 2018.
5. These regulations shall take effect from April 13, 2024.