Regulations for Research and Publication Ethics


  • HOME
  • EDITORIAL POLICY
  • Regulations for Research and Publication Ethics

Adopted November 9, 2007
First Amendment March 3, 2008
Second Amendment August 31, 2014
Third Amendment November 12, 2016
Fourth Amendment May 31, 2020

Table of contents

I General Provisions
Article 1 (Purpose) The Regulations for Research and Publication Ethics of STEM is to prevent STEM members who would like to submit and publish their works from committing research misdemeanors with an aim to providing directions and basic principles for the roles and responsibilities in abiding by research ethics.
Article 2 (Oath) New member of STEM shall make an oath to observe these research ethics regulations. It shall be regarded that the existing member has made the oath to observe these research ethics regulations when they are enforced.
Article 3 (Focus) These regulations are applied to all members who submit to and publish manuscripts through STEM and who give a presentation in a STEM conference. However, misdemeanors committed 5 years ago from the date which the report is received will not be regarded in principle.
Article 4 (Scope) All manuscripts submitted and published in a conference or a journal of STEM must conform to this regulation unless there are special stipulations in relevant laws or regulations.
II Ethical Principles of Research
Article 5 (Researcher’s Role and Responsibilities) The researcher shall conduct research on his or her own, based on freedom of research, but shall comply with the following.
  • 1. Respect and fair treatment of the subject
  • 2. Protection of personal information and privacy of research subjects
  • 3. Progress of honest and transparent research based on facts
  • 4. Protection of their academic conscience as a professional when returning expert knowledge to society
  • 5. Recognizing the achievements of and respecting prior researchers by revealing their sources in appropriate ways when using the works of themselves and others
  • 6. Understanding the research ethics and guidelines for preventing plagiarism
Article 6 (Principle of Human Research Ethics) Researchers conducting research on humans should observe the following:
  • 1. Research in which humans are the subject of research or which includes a method of research for humans should be socially and ethically acceptable and care should be taken not to be unethical in the research process and outcome processing.
  • 2. The researcher should describe the research process to the participants and explain to the participants the discomfort or risk that may arise from participating in the study, as well as the benefits of participating in the study.
  • 3. If the study requires an experiment, explain the experimental procedure.
  • 4. Participants should be given the opportunity to ask questions if they have questions about the procedure of the study.
  • 5. Participants who agree to participate in the study should be informed that they can withdraw and that they may stop participating in the study.
  • 6. The researcher should not distort the purpose, direction and results of the research with compensation or money for the participants.
  • 7. The researcher should confirm that data obtained from participants is used only for academic purposes.
  • 8. The researcher should confirm that data obtained from participants is used for academic purposes after deleting all their personal information.
  • 9. It is recommended that an IRB confirmation certificate should be submitted in case research papers deal with human participants and are supported by research funds.
III Research Misconduct
Article 7 (Scope of Research Misconduct) Research Misconduct refers to falsification, modulation, plagiarism, an indication of unfair academic authors, and duplicate publication and simultaneous submission in the course of the proposed research task, performance of research tasks, reporting and presentation of research results.
Specific misconduct is as follows.
  • 1. “Forgery” means behavior that falsely makes data or research results.
  • 2. “Falsification” means behavior that distorts the contents and results of the research by manipulating the research material/device/process artificially or deteriorating/deleting the data optionally.
  • 3. “Plagiarism” refers to the act of stealing other people’s ideas, research contents, research results, etc. without proper approval or citation. In particular, plagiarism is the use of other people’s intellectual property at will, even if the intentional or unintentional plagiarism is not explicitly stated.
    • 1) An act to utilize all or part of another person’s research without indicating its source
    • 2) An act to use part of a variation in the structure of words and sentences in another person’s work without marking the source
    • 3) An act to use other people’s original ideas, etc., without indicating the source
    • 4) An act to translate another’s work and not to indicate its origin
  • 4. “False Indication of Authors” means behavior that excludes, without valid reason or behavior, from the author list those who have contributed to research and outcomes or that includes under the banner of respect and gratitude anyone in the author list who has made no contribution.
    • 1) Grant author qualification without contributing or contributing to research content or results
    • 2) Do not grant author qualification with contribution or contribution to research content or results
    • 3) Publish the thesis of a student in the name of the academic advisor in his / her own name
  • 5. “Duplicate Publication” refers to the practice of trying to use all or sections of previously published works in a new study, as if it were being published for the first time.
    • 1) Reusing important ideas, research content, and research results without indicating their source in the published work
    • 2) Reusing content that is identical or substantially similar to one’s p`revious work that hurts the identity of the study
    • 3) Republishing a work that is identical or substantially similar to one’s own previous work in different languages
    • 4) Publishing a work that is identical or substantially similar to one’s own previous work, receiving research funds or earning unfair profits as a separate research achievement
    If authors want a secondary publication for a different group of readers, they must receive approval from the editors from both journals and indicate that it is a secondary publication of a primary publication while making sure to cite the original work. Also, “Simultaneous Submission” refers to the practice of submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. However, submitting the manuscript to other journals after receiving the notification of the review result as a ‘Rejected for Publication’ in the first submitted journal is not considered to be ‘Simultaneous Submission’.
  • 6. Other behavior that is beyond an acceptable range in this academic field is also regarded as a misdemeanor.
IV Regulations for Authors Ethics
Article 8 (The prohibition of “Forgery”) Authors must not falsely make data or research results.
Article 9 (The prohibition of “Falsification”) Authors must not optionally distort the contents and results of the research by manipulating the research material/device/process artificially or by deteriorating/deleting the data optionally.
Article 10 (The prohibition of “Plagiarism”) Authors must not steal the ideas, contents/results of the research of others without the proper approval or citation.
Article 11 (The prohibition of “False indication of authors”) Authors must not exclude from the author list those who have contributed to the research and its outcome without valid reasons or behavior that includes in the author list those who have no contribution under the banner of respect and gratitude. Authors must not use their positions to list themselves as the first author or authors of research they have not contributed to.
Article 12 (The prohibition of “Duplicate publication/Simultaneous submission”) Authors must not submit their manuscripts that have already been published in a domestic/foreign journal without disclosing the fact. Also, the same manuscript shall not be submitted to more than one journal at the same time.
Article 13 (Prevention of “Conflict of Interest”) When there are potential risks of a Conflict of Interest in submitting a manuscript, the authors should report the fact to the Editorial Board in advance.
Article 14 (Prevention of research misconduct by co-authors with personal connections)
  • 1) A paper in which minors (those under the age of 19) or family members (spouse, children and relatives as far as fourth cousins, hereinafter referred to as "people with personal connections" participate, should clearly be able to demonstrate the contribution to the research and to the manuscript writing process from those people they have are personally connected to.
  • 2) A joint research paper of co-authors with personal connections should submit a 'Pre-release Form for Co-authoring a Publication with People with Personal Connection' in the paper submission.
Article 15 (Similarity Test) When submitting a manuscript, the author should conduct a similarity test and submit the result in writing.
Article 16 (Revision of Manuscript) The authors should endeavor to incorporate the revision requirements of the Editorial Board and the reviewers proposed in the review procedure and inform the Editorial Board of the details of the grounds and reasons for not agreeing to the comments.
Ⅴ Regulations of the Editorial Board Ethics
Article 17 (Request for Review) The Editorial Board shall appoint three reviewers who are specialists in the field of the manuscript to be reviewed, taking into consideration any reasons for avoidance or exclusion along with academic activities and expertise, and request them to review the manuscript.
Article 18 (Editing Process) The Editorial Board shall operate the general procedure according to strict standards and process, such as reviewing the submitted manuscripts and making decisions on the acceptance of the manuscripts.
Article 19 (Secrecy) The Editorial Board is not allowed to disclose the author’s name, the evaluation result, or the contents of the manuscript to any other person except the reviewers until it is decided to publish the submitted manuscript.
ⅤI Regulations for Reviewers Ethics
Article 20 (Fairness of Evaluation) Reviewers shall conduct the general procedure according to strict standards and processes, related to reviewing submitted manuscripts and making decisions about the acceptance of the manuscripts.
Article 21 (Avoidance and Exclusion of Reviewing) Reviewers who may harm the fairness and neutrality of the review process should be excluded or remove themselves from reviewing. If the reviewer can identify the author pursuant to the content of the manuscript or discover a conflict of interest, the reviewer should return the manuscript and notify the situation to the Chair of the Editorial Board immediately.
Article 22 (Respecting Authors’ Personalities) Reviewers should respect the author’s character and academic independence in reviewing. When the reviewer asks the author to make corrections and revisions, he/she shall justify their request and give reasons with specific explanations in the form of a manuscript evaluation. The reviewer should not use insulting expressions and demeaning words. Recuse
Article 23 (Secrecy) The reviewer is not allowed to disclose any details about the writer or the contents of the manuscript until the reviewing process is complete and it has been decided to publish the submitted manuscript. After finishing the reviewing procedure, and before publication, reviewers should not cite the contents of the submitted manuscript without the author’s consent.
VII Handling and Verification of Research Misconduct
Article 24 (Handling Procedures of the Misconduct) Any misconduct shall be dealt with according to following procedures;
  • 1. Receipt of information about the Misconduct
  • 2. Informed matter shall be immediately reported to the chairman and be informed to the Research Ethics Committee.
  • 3. The Research Ethics Committee shall conduct a self-investigation.
  • 4. Examination process on the Misconduct shall be composed of preliminary review, main investigation, and judgment.
Article 25 (Verification Procedures of the Misconduct) Any misconduct shall be dealt with according to the following procedures:
  • 1. To convene a meeting of the Research Ethics Committee
  • 2. To secure supporting evidence
  • 3. To determine whether or not the Misconduct has been done and then, to inform the concerned party
  • 4. To make and submit a report provided by the Research Ethics Committee
  • 5. To make a disciplinary decision and to report it to the Executive Board
  • 6. To make an announcement on the society webpage and the next journal and to delete the article in the journal list
  • 7. To inform the Korea Research Foundation of results of handling and management of the misconduct
Article 26 (Post Management)
  • 1. In case any misconduct occurs, the whole process from receipt of report to treatment shall be recorded and kept in documents.
  • 2. Outcome of the misconduct shall be announced on the society webpage to inform other researchers of the importance of research ethics and to publicize prevention of a similar case.
  • 3. Research ethics regulations shall be announced to members in order to promote awareness of ethics and morality as a researcher.
VIII Research Misconduct Report and Protection of Rights
Article 27 (Reporting of Misconducts) An informant can use any means such as verbally/in writing/by telephone or e-mail to convey their information, which in principle shall be made in their real name. However, even if it is anonymous information, if the manuscript name, concrete contents and evidence of the misdemeanor are given in writing or by e-mail, the learned society shall treat this in a way corresponding to information given in the real name.
Article 28 (Protection of Informant’s Rights)
  • 1. The Research Ethics Committee shall not disclose the informant’s identity directly or indirectly.
  • 2. The Research Ethics Committee shall take steps to prevent an informant from receiving any disadvantage owing to this report.
  • 3. The informant has the right to know the investigation procedure, schedule and list of inspectors which will be executed after the report of the illegal behavior. The Research Ethics Committee shall respond to this unless this influences the investigation.
Article 29 (Protection of Examinee’s Rights)
  • 1. The Research Ethics Committee shall pay heed to the fact that the reputation or right of the examinee may not be infringed upon during the investigation. Any suspicion shall not be disclosed to anyone outside until the judgment is fixed.
  • 2.The Research Ethics Committee shall take efforts not to violate the examinee’s reputation and rights until the judgment is fixed.
  • 3. The examinee has the right to ask about the investigation procedure and its contents until the judgment is fixed.
Article 30 (Secrecy) Any report, investigation, deliberation, vote, or proposed action about the misdemeanor shall be disclosed. Any person who participates in this investigation directly or indirectly shall not disclose any information which they gain in the performance of their duties. In case there is a reasonable need to disclose it, the minimum amount of information will be made available to the public with the president’s approval.
IX Research Misconduct Investigation
Article 31 (Principle of Investigation)
  • 1. The responsibility to prove the misconduct of the examinee shall belong to the Research Ethics Committee. In case the examinee damages materials which the committee has asked them to submit or refuses to submit materials, the responsibility to justify the truth shall belong to the examinee.
  • 2. The Research Ethics Committee shall guarantee the opportunity to state opinions, make any objection, and make a defense.
Article 32 (Investigation)
  • 1. The investigation shall begin within 10 days from the date when the allegations are received. During this period, an Investigation Committee shall be set up to investigate the alleged misconducts.
  • 2. The investigation shall be completed within 60 days from the date when the investigation started.
  • 3. If the Investigation Committee determines that it cannot finish the examination within the period stipulated in Paragraph 2, it shall extend the period up to 30 more days with the Research Ethics Committee’s approval.
Article 33 (Approval of Investigation Result)
  • 1. The Investigation Committee shall make a report after completing the investigation. The results of the Investigation Committee shall be notified in written form to the Research Ethics Committee to obtain the committee’s approval.
  • 2. The report shall include the contents of the following clauses:
    • 1) The reported content
    • 2) The title of the research project or article subject to investigation
    • 3) The examinee’s role and suspicion of misconduct in the research project or article concerned
    • 4) The relevant evidence or testimony
    • 5) The informant and the examinee’s objections or defense of the investigation results and the result of how to deal with their objections or defense
    • 6) A list of the Investigation Committee members
Article 34 (Judgment)
  • 1. Judgment shall be completed within 7 days after obtaining the approval of the Research Ethics Committee.
  • 2. Judgment shall be fixed through voting by the Research Ethics Committee. The informant and examinee shall be notified in writing of the contents of the judgment within 7 days.
Article 35 (Raising of Objection/ Request for a Retrial) In case the informant or examinee does not accept the judgment, they are entitled to raise an objection within 10 days from the date of notification. The Research Ethics Committee shall start a reinvestigation if the committee decides that the objection is reasonable.
Article 36 (Actions on the Judgment Result)
  • 1. The Research Ethics Committee may recommend the president take disciplinary action against a person or persons engaged in a misdemeanor as follows:
    • 1) Any misdemeanors stipulated in ChapterⅢArticle 7
    • 2) Any behavior forcing others to conduct misdemeanors or suggesting others conduct misdemeanors
    • 3) Any behavior interrupting their own or another’s investigation of a misdemeanor intentionally or intimidating an informant
    • 4) Any behavior making a wrong report intentionally
  • 2. The Research Ethics Committee may recommend the president take disciplinary action against an author judged as having committed a misconduct concerning Journal of English Teaching through Movies and Media published in the current year as follows:
    • 1) Prohibition of submission to Journal of English Teaching through Movies and Media for 5 years
    • 2) Deletion of the relevant article from the STEM website
    • 3) Notification of this misdemeanor to the contracted cyber publisher and requesting the relevant article be deleted
    • 4) Making an official announcement about the judgment in the first issue of Journal of English Teaching through Movies and Media published after the misconduct has been determined and on the website
    • 5) Notifying this misconduct to the National Research Foundation of Korea with the minutes of the Research Ethics Committee showing the result
    • 6) Notifying this misconduct to the relevant institution (schools related to entrance examination and admission, and research institution, etc.) which the author(s) has taken advantage from.
Article 37 (Investigation Prescription)
  • 1. Misconducts conducted 5 years before the date the misconduct was recognized or a report was received are not subject to investigation even though they will be recognized or received in principle.
  • 2. Even if a misconduct was committed more than 5 years prior to its recognition, if the examinee cites the results of the research directly and the misconduct may cause a serious problem both internally and externally, the misconduct shall be subject to an investigation.
Article 38 (Keeping and Making Public Records)
  • 1.The records relevant to the misconduct investigation shall be kept for 5 years after the date the judgment has been made.
  • 2. The report of the investigation results is allowed to be opened after the judgment has been ruled. However, any information identifying the informant, the investigation committee members, witnesses, and the testifier may be excluded from being disclosed if making the records public might cause disadvantage to them.
X Research Ethics Committee
Article 39 (Establishment) The Society of Teaching English through Media (STEM) establishes the Research Ethics Committee to deliberate on the investigation and determine the measure of the misconduct.
Article 40 (Functions) The Research Ethics Committee shall deliberate on the counts as follows:
  • 1. Whether the report of the misconduct has been received and whether the investigation has been conducted.
  • 2. The count about the start of the investigation, the approval of the investigation result, and judgment or retrial.
  • 3. The count about protection of the informant and the examinee.
  • 4. The count about measures according to the results of the misconduct investigation and any follow-up measures.
  • 5. The general count about any other operations of the Research Ethics Committee.
Article 41 (Composition)
  • 1. The Research Ethics Committee members shall be appointed from among respected scholars according to their personalities and ethical standards.
  • 2. The Research Ethics Committee will be composed of 5 members or so from among the board members.
  • 3. The committee members shall be appointed by the president with their term of office lasting for two years with the possibility to serve consecutive terms.
Article 42 (Duties of Committee Chair)
  • 1. The Research Ethics Committee chair shall represent the committee and preside over the committee meetings.
  • 2. In case the chair cannot perform his or her duties due to unavoidable business, the other committee members will execute the duties for him or her.
Article 43 (Meeting)
  • 1. The Research Ethics Committee chair shall call for meetings and be designated the president.
  • 2. Decisions of the meeting shall be made by more than half of the registered committee members and approval by more than two-thirds of the committee members present.
  • 3. In case the deliberation agenda is judged as a slight agenda, the chair is allowed to replace the meeting with the deliberations in writing.
  • 4. The meeting is closed in principle. However, if necessity is found, an interested person can attend and his/her opinions can be heard.
Article 44 (Exclusion) A Research Ethics Committee member who is considered directly relevant to the current issue shall not be engaged in the deliberations and voting on the issue.
XI Investigation Committee
Article 45 (Establishment) The Research Ethics Committee may have an Investigation Committee in order to make the investigation of a misconduct fair and systematic.
Article 46 (Composition)
  • 1. The Investigation Committee members shall be composed of 5 members or so and be appointed from among the Research Ethics Committee by the Research Ethics Committee chair.
  • 2. The Research Ethics Committee chair shall appoint one member of the Investigation Committee as the Investigation Committee chair. The Investigation Committee chair shall appoint an administrative assistant from among the Investigation Committee members.
  • 3. Any person involved in this matter is not allowed to be a member of the Investigation Committee.
Article 47 (Authority)
  • 1. In case the Investigation Committee finds the presence of an informant, the examinee, a witness, or testifier necessary in order to receive their statements, it shall request their presence. In particular, the examinee’s presence is mandatory.
  • 2. The Investigation Committee might request the examinee’s materials be submitted. With the approval of the president, a person suspected of a misdemeanor shall have access to their office limited, as well as relevant research data and digital files seized and kept in order to preserve the relevant evidence.
Article 48 (Meeting)
  • 1. The Investigation Committee chair shall call for meetings and act as president.
  • 2. Meetings are closed in principle. However, if it is found to be necessary, an interested person can attend and his/her opinions can be heard even though the interested person is not a member.
Article 49 (Expense) The budget for the operation and the investigation of the committee shall be appropriated separately and be providable.

Journal of English
Teaching through
Movies and Media

Print ISSN: 1598-1002
Online ISSN: 2765-7078

  • 1,177 The Juku Online Writing System as an Interactive College English Writing Instructional Tool in China
    586 A Study on Instructed MWEs With Reference to the Movie After
    370 The Significance of EFL Learners’ Criteria Awareness of Task-Based Language Teaching
    347 Integration of Content Instruction and Language Instruction in the Movie English Classroom: On the Basis of Embodiment, Image Schemas, and Metaphors
    525 A Case Study on Reading Aloud Using English TV News

    +more

    +more

    • GoogleScholar
    • Similarity Check
    • Crossref Cited-by Linking
    • CrossMark
    • Funder Registry
    • ORCID


ABOUT
BROWSE ARTICLES
EDITORIAL POLICY
FOR CONTRIBUTORS
Editorial Office
#1219, Bugak building, Kookmin University,
Jeongneung-ro 77, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 02707, Korea
E-mail: stem@stemedia.co.kr                

Copyright © 2021 by The Society for Teaching English through Media.

Developed in M2PI

Close layer
prev next