The Code of Research Ethics of the 『Brain, Digital, & Learning』
Revised in March 20, 2015
Revised in January 01, 2017
Revised in January 01, 2018
The purpose of this regulation is to prevent research misconduct in advance and to regulate the research ethics of the articles published and submitted in the journal 『Brain, Digital, & learning』 of the institute of Brain based Education, Korean National University of Education. This research ethical code is applied to all author who submitted or published the article in the journal 『Brain, Digital, & learning』 of the institute of Brain based Education, Korean National University of Education.
Chapter 1. Research ethics regulations
Article 1. A researcher who conducts the following acts is subject to further investigations of research cheating:
(1) Forgery : The conduct of fabricating non-existing data or research outcomes recoding or reporting them as actual and existing.
(2) Falsification : The conduct of counterfeiting research materials, tool, and/or research processes or the conduct of altering or omitting research data and outcomes so the research record becomes inconsistent with the truth.
(3) Plagiarism : The conduct of plagiarizing authors’ idea, research progress, and/or results without proper approval.
(4) False Indication of Authors : The conduct of excluding from the author list those who have contributed to research and outcome without valid reasons or the conduct of including in the author list those who have no contribution under the banner of respect and gratitude.
(5) The conduct to doing harm the informant or intentionally interfere investigated alleged cheating of the person or others.
(6) The seriously deviating conduct from the norms of research normally accepted in other academic fields.
Article 2. Publication accomplishment
(1) The authors are solely responsible for the research they have done or contributed, and they are also recognized as accomplishments.
(2) The order of authors should be accurately reflected in their contribution to the research regardless of their relative status. Simply being in a position can not justify being an author or being recognized as a first author. On the other hand, it can not be justified not to be recorded as co-authors or collaborators even though they have contributed to research or writing.
(3) If quoted quantities are beyond the range of commonly accepted quotations, quotation must be obtained from the author, even if the source is indicated.
(4) If several people co-authored, it can not be tolerated to publish or publish in paper as if it were their own independent achievement without the consent of the co-authors as a whole.
Article 3. Duplicate or double publication of research
The author does not publish or attempt to publish his or her previously published study as if it were a new research, at the home and abroad. If you want to publish using the published research, you should provide the journal editor with information about the previous publication and check whether it is a duplicate publication or a double publication. But, thesis and symposium articles are not applicable to this regulation.
Article 4. Quotation and reference mark
(1) When quoting published scholarly material, try to describe it accurately. If you do not belong to common sense, you must clearly identify the source clearly. In the case of data obtained through the evaluation of research articles, research proposals or through personal contact, it can only be quoted after the consent of the researcher who provided the information.
(2) When quoting someone’s text or referring to an idea, you must quote and refer to it footnotes. Through this mark, readers should ensure that they are fully aware of what part is the result of the previous study and which part is your original idea, assertion, or interpretation.
Article 5. Revision of thesis
The author endeavors to incorporate the comments of the editorial committee and paper examiner presented in the evaluation process as much as possible and to reflect them in the paper. If you do not agree with these comments, you should write down the grounds and reason details and inform the editorial committee.
Chapter 2. Code of Ethics
Article 1. Code of Ethics
Contributors to 『Brain, Digital, & Learning』 must pledge to abide by this “Code of Ethics”.
Article 2. Organization and Operation of Research Ethics Committee
The Research Ethics Committee is operated to deliberate and resolve issues related to the research ethics of the Research Committee.
1. The committee shall be replaced by the steering committee of the Institute.
2. The chairman of the editorial committee is either the Institute director or the person appointed by the director.
3. If a chairman or director is deemed necessary, the chairman convenes a committee.
4. The Ethics Committee shall deliberate and decide within 60 days from the date of receipt of the matter.
5. The decision of the research ethics violation shall be determined by the majority of the registered attendance and an approval of majority of the attendance.
6. The decision shall be determined by the attendance of a majority of a majority of the registered members and an approval of majority of the members present.
7. If research cheating is confirmed, the Ethics Committee shall determine the type of disciplinary and disclose it.
8. The Ethics Committee shall notify the parties concerned of the decision within 10 days from the date of the decision.
9. All such matters relating to the investigation process of committee must be kept confidential.
10. Before the publication of the journal, the committee confirms the compliance of research ethics through regular meetings.
11. The corresponding author should submit the results of the plagiarism screening before the article is published.
Article 3. Function of Research Ethics Committee
The Research Ethics committee is:
1. to determine and implement policies related to research ethics.
2. to determine whether submissions meet the Brain, Digital, & Learning policy and impose disciplinary measure if necessary
3. to address issue related to the violation of research ethics and the prevention of such conduct.
4. to handle other matters presented for discussion by the Chairman.
Article 4. Security that sue of research cheating and opportunities for defending
1. Individuals, schools, and academic organizations may ask the institute to consider whether a particular act of a contributor or author of the 『Brain, Digital, & Learning』 is a research misconduct.
2. The ethics committee should protect the petitioner’s identity and treat her/him as equally treated as not violating research ethics until the party’s violation is confirmed.
3. Contributor or authors who submitted for violations of the Code of Ethics should cooperate with the investigation conducted by the Institute’s Ethics Committee.
4. The Ethics Committee should give the petitioner enough opportunity to defend.
Article 5. Confidentiality Protection for Investigators
The ethics committee shall not disclose the identity of the contributor to the outside until our final disciplinary decision is made against a violation of the “Code of Ethics”
Article 6. Procedure and follow-up management of research cheating
If you find any research cheating that falls under Article 1 Chapter 1, report it immediately to the Ethics Chairman. If there is a disciplinary recommendation from the Ethics Committee, the Chairman of the Ethics Committee shall hold an Ethics Committee within 60 days from the date of the proposal and shall make a final decision by reviewing and resolving on disciplinary and disciplinary content. A warning will be sent to a contributor who is found to have violated the “Code of Ethics”. If a article has already been published in a journal, it can be canceled and excluded from the original service. Disciplinary measures such as prohibition of submission of this journal for three years, and this action can be notified to other organizations or individuals. In addition, cheating may be notified in writing to the affiliated organization of the cheater. For cheaters, they shall strictly manage the punishment of the contributor with the contents of the cheating and disciplinary period.
Article 7. Revision of the Code of Ethics
The procedure for revising the “Code of Ethics” is based on revision procedure of publication regulation『Brain, Digital, & learning』of the institute of Brain based Education, Korean National University of Education.
If the “Code of Ethics” is revised, the contributors who pledge to abide by the existing regulations are deemed to have pledged to abide by the new regulations without additional pledges.
This code of conduct came into force on January 01, 2013.