Since publishing an article in the journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge, it is important to follow the standard of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing articles: the author, the journal editor, the reviewer, and the publisher. For the policies on research and publication ethics that are not stated in these instructions, the Guidelines on Good Publication Practice provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines) can be applied. These guidelines include detailed descriptions of the following items:

Responsibilities of Editors

• Confidentiality: Editors must maintain the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript and ensure that information regarding manuscripts is not disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and manage them appropriately. They should not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the express written consent of the author.
• Publication Decision and Fair Play: Editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The decision should be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
• Prevention and Oversight of Ethical Violations: Editors and publishers are responsible for preventing and supervising ethical violations. They must establish and maintain procedures to detect and address any breaches of publication ethics.
• Handling Ethical Violations: If editors or publishers identify any breach of publication ethics, they must take appropriate actions to investigate and resolve the issue, including the possibility of retracting or correcting the publication.
• Guidelines for Retraction and Correction: The journal must have clear guidelines on retractions and corrections. Editors and publishers should be willing to issue corrections, clarifications, retractions, or apologies whenever necessary to maintain the integrity of the academic record.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
• Timely Process and Helping Editorial Decision: Reviewers are expected to conduct their reviews promptly and to help the editor in making editorial decisions through their critical evaluation of the manuscript.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
• Objective Judgments: Reviews should be conducted objectively, with observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving their manuscripts.
• Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Responsibilities of Authors

• Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
• Acknowledgement of Source: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
• Authorship: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
• Reporting Standards and Retractions or Corrections of Mistakes: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper.
• Participation in Peer Review Process: Authors are expected to participate in the peer review process, including responding to editors' requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethical approval for research involving humans or animals.

Responsibilities of the Journal Publisher

We are committed to making sure that advertisement, reprint or other commercial revenue has no influence on the editorial decisions. In addition, we are working tightly with other publishers and associations to set standards for best practices on ethical issues and are prepared to provide specialized legal review if needed.

Code of Ethics in Research

 PDF Download

Chapter 1: General Provisions

Article 1 (Purpose)
The purpose of this Code is to establish ethical principles for manuscripts that are published, planned to be published, or under review by the Korean Institute of Information Scientists and Engineers (hereinafter “the Institute”), to prevent violation of the ethical principles for manuscripts, and to stipulate matters regarding the establishment and operation of the Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter “the Committee”) to ensure fair and systematic resolution when unethical acts take place.

Article 2 (Applicability)
This Code can be applied to manuscripts (planned to be) published in academic journals issued by the Institute.

Article 3 (Scope of Application)
Target manuscripts shall be subject to this Code unless other special provisions related to the establishment and verification of ethical principles for manuscripts take precedence.

Article 4 (Definitions of Terms)
① Acts in violation of the ethical principles for manuscripts (hereinafter “misconduct”) include fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and improper authorship.

1. 'Fabrication' refers to the creation of data or reporting of research results that do not exist.
2. 'Falsification' refers to the altering of the content or results of a manuscript by manipulating its materials, equipment, and procedures or by intentionally modifying or omitting data.
3. 'Plagiarism' refers to the appropriation of some else’s ideas, research, or results without proper citation.
4. 'Self-plagiarism' refers to the reusing if a considerable portion of a copyrighted manuscript that has already been published in another journal by the author in the same language, with slight or no modification or without an explicit citation or reference.
5. ‘Improper authorship’ refers to the failure to grant authorship of the manuscript to those who have contributed to the research content or results or have made relevant scientific/technical contributions without justifiable reasons, or granting authorship to those who have not contributed to the research content or results or made relevant scientific/technical contributions for the purpose of expressing gratitude or courtesy.

② An 'informant' refers to a person who recognizes any misconduct or provides proof of misconduct to the Institute.
③ An ‘examinee’ refers to a person who investigates the misconduct based on a report or recognition by the Institute.
This does not include consultants or witnesses in the investigation process.
④ ‘Preliminary investigation’ refers to the process of determining whether an official investigation into the alleged misconduct is necessary.
⑤ 'Main investigation' refers to the process of verifying facts of the alleged misconduct.
⑥ 'Decision' refers to the process of finalizing the investigation and notifying the informant and examinee of the results in writing.
⑦ 'Starting date of the period of prescription' refers to the publication date of the manuscript related to the misconduct. If the manuscript is flagged for misconduct in several cases, then the most recent publication date is the date of extinctive prescription.

Chapter 2: Research Ethics of Authors

Article 5 (Responsibility)
① Authors must contribute to the development of the discipline by announcing new academic results through honest and transparent research based on facts.
② If the author of the paper uses the achievements of previous researchers, he/she must respect the achievements of previous researchers and clearly state it.
③ Even if the author of the paper publishes a research paper based on his or her previous research achievement, the source must be clearly identified to clarify his or her new academic contribution.
④ Authors must not engage in unjust acts (acts specified in Article 4, Paragraph 1).

Article 6 (Duplicate Submission Prohibited)
The author of the paper does not submit research papers that are scheduled to be published in other academic journals or are under review.

Article 7 (Indication of Collaborative Researchers)
① The author of the paper must present the researcher who contributed to the joint research as a co-author or co-researcher.
② The order of authors or researchers in joint research papers should be reflected and presented according to the degree of contribution to the research regardless of their relative status.

Chapter 3: Establishment and Operation of the Committee

Article 8 (Function)
To secure ethical principles for manuscripts, the Committee reviews and decides on matters concerning the following:
 

1. The establishment and operation of ethics related affairs
2. The filing of reports on misconduct, the composition of the Investigation Committee, and the commission of investigators
3. The initialization of the preliminary and main investigations
4. The protection of informants and restoration of the reputation of examinees
5. The processing of preliminary and main investigation results and establishing follow-up measures
6. Other matters presented by the chairperson
 

Article 9 (Composition)
① The Committee shall comprise one chairperson and five to seven members. The chairperson and members are appointed by the president of the Institute.
② The term of the chairperson and members is one year, and reappointment is possible.

Article 10 (Chairperson)
The chairperson represents the committee and convenes and presides over the meetings.

Article 11 (Secretary)
The Committee shall include one secretary, the secretary-general of the Institute, to manage administrative tasks.

Article 12 (Meetings)
① The chairperson shall convene Committee meetings and serve as their chair.
② The meeting shall be resolved with the attendance of more than half of the members present and the consent of more than half of the members present, but the resolution on the demand for disciplinary actions based on the unfair conduct confirmed by the investigation committee constituted under Article 17 requires the consent of at least 2/3 of the members present.
③ The chairperson may make a written decision when he/she considers that the agenda item is of minor importance.

Chapter 4: Verification of Manuscript Ethics

Article 13 (Reporting and Filing of Misconduct)
① Reports must be made to the secretary of the Committee in his or her real name by means of writing, telephone, e-mail, etc., including the contents of each of the following subparagraphs.

1. Paper title
2. Details and grounds of unfair conduct
3. Matters related to other unfair acts

② Even if it is an anonymous report, the chairperson may process it in accordance with the real-name report if it is reported in writing or by e-mail, including the details and evidence of the specific wrongful act.

Article 14 (Period and Method of Preliminary Investigation)
① The preliminary investigation shall be initiated within 15 days of the report filing date, completed within 30 days of the investigation start, and approved by the Committee.
② The chairperson designates up to three preliminary investigators from among the members, but excludes those who have an interest in the examinee.
③ The preliminary investigation shall determine the necessity of the main investigation through a review of the following matters:

1. Whether the report content itself falls under misconduct stipulated in Article 4, Clause 1.
2. Whether the report content is specific and sufficiently clear to allow an investigation into the truth
3. Whether five years have elapsed from the report date to the starting date of the period of prescription

④ If the person under investigation acknowledges all the wrongdoings and the facts are confirmed, the main investigation may not be conducted, and in this case, the committee can make a decision based only on the results of the preliminary investigation.
⑤ The preliminary investigator shall prepare an investigation result report including the following within 15 days after completion of the preliminary investigation and report it to the Committee.

1. Details of the report
2. Description of allegations of wrongdoing that were the subject of investigation and related papers
3. Recommendation and basis for judgment on whether or not to conduct this investigation
4. List of investigators
5. Other relevant evidence
 

Article 15 (Notification of Preliminary Investigation Results)
The results of the preliminary investigation shall be notified in writing to the informant within 10 days after approval by the committee. However, this is not the case when the informant is anonymous.

Article 16 (Initialization and Duration of Investigation)
① The investigation shall be initiated within 30 days of the Committee’s approval of preliminary investigation results, during which period the subcommittee to conduct the investigation (hereinafter “Investigation Committee”) shall be formed.
② The investigation including the decision-making shall be completed within 90 days from the start date of the investigation.
③ If it is decided that the Investigation Committee cannot complete the investigation within the period specified in Clause 2, then the reasons for this shall be explained to the Committee, and an extension period shall be requested.

Article 17 (Composition of the Investigation Committee)
① The Investigation Committee shall consist of five to seven committee members and related experts.
② Those with a conflict of interest related to the investigation shall not be included in the Investigation Committee.

Article 18 (Request for Submission of Materials)
The Investigation Committee may request the informant, examinee, witnesses, and consultants to submit additional materials, in which case the informant and examinee must faithfully respond to the Investigation Committee’s request.

Article 19 (Protection of Rights and Confidentiality of Informant and Reported Author)
① Under no circumstances shall the identity of the informant be directly or indirectly exposed. To protect the informant, the informant’s name shall not be included in the investigation report unless absolutely necessary.
② Under no circumstances shall the identity of the examinee or the fact that the examinee is being investigated be exposed outside the Committee and Investigation Committee until the verification of misconduct is completed. In addition, care shall be taken not to infringe on the honor or rights of the examinee, and efforts shall be made to restore the reputation of an examinee found to be innocent of misconduct.
③ All matters related to the investigation, including the report, investigation, deliberation, decision, and suggested measures, shall be kept confidential. The individuals who directly or indirectly participate in the investigation shall not disclose any information during the execution of the investigation or related tasks.
However, in the event that reasonable disclosure is necessary, information may be released after a resolution is made by the Committee.

Article 20 (Guarantee of Rights to Objection and Argument)
The Investigation Committee shall ensure that the right and opportunity to express opinions, objections, and arguments to the committee secretary are equally guaranteed to the respondents and is held responsible to provide details on the relevant procedures in advance.

Article 21 (Decision)
① The Investigation Committee shall finalize the content and results of the investigation based on objections or arguments and notify the informant and examinee of the same.
② If no consensus is reached on the content and results of the investigation, it may be decided by vote, in which case both a majority vote of the currently registered members and a majority vote of the members in attendance are required.
③ If the informant or examinee is dissatisfied with the Investigation Committee’s investigation results, he/she may file a request for re-examination to the Committee within 15 days from the notification date of the results.
④ The Committee shall decide on the validity of the objection and whether to proceed with re-examination within 15 days of receiving the statement. If the Committee decides to re-examine the case, then the same or a new investigation committee shall be convened within 15 days.
⑤ If a reexamination is decided, the investigation committee in charge of the reexamination will re-investigate the objection raised within 45 days after convening the investigation committee, confirm the result, and notify the informant and the person under investigation.
⑥ If the investigation committee determines that the investigation cannot be completed within the period set forth in Paragraph 5, it shall explain the reason to the committee and request an extension of the period.

Article 22 (Submission of Investigation Report)
① The Investigation Committee shall submit a report of the main investigation results (hereinafter “final report”) within 15 days of the final decision.
② The final report shall include the following items:

1. Detailed contents of the informant’s report
2. Alleged misconduct and related manuscript(s) subject to investigation
3. Examinee’s role in the manuscript and whether the allegations are true
4. Related evidence
5. Objections or arguments of the informant and examinee to the investigation results, and the results of decisions on the same
6. List of investigators

Chapter 5: Measures after Verification

Article 23 (Measures according to Results)
① The Committee may recommend disciplinary action for the individuals related to the misconduct to the president of the Institute if a vote of more than half of the registered members and two-thirds of the members in attendance is reached.
② The president of the Institute shall decide on appropriate disciplinary action and notify the examinee of the action in writing.

Article 24 (Disciplinary Action)
① If the Committee recommends disciplinary action, then the president of the Institute shall determine the severity of disciplinary action according to prescribed procedures in the following clauses. If further disciplinary action is deemed appropriate, such action may also be taken. 　

1. (Caution) Manuscript authors are notified of the misconduct and advised to take caution when preparing future manuscripts.
2. (Warning) Manuscript authors are notified of the misconduct, the publication is withdrawn, and authors are warned to take caution when preparing future manuscripts.
3. (Censure) Manuscript authors are notified of the misconduct, the publication is withdrawn, and a notice of the misconduct is posted on the Institute’s bulletin board for a duration of one month. In addition, all manuscripts under review or awaiting publication by the authors at fault are canceled by the Institute, and the main authors of the manuscript are prohibited from submitting a paper to the Institute for the next three (3) years.
4. (Strict Censure) The chairpersons of the organizations that each author is affiliated with are officially notified of the misconduct in writing. Past publications are retracted and a notice of the same is posted on the Institute’s website for a duration of one month. In addition, all manuscripts under review or awaiting publication by the authors at fault are canceled by the Institute, and the all authors of the manuscript are prohibited from submitting a paper to the Institute for the next three (3) years. 　

② If the misconduct is plagiarism, the chairperson of the society is requested to provide an official letter of apology to the authors of the original paper after the abovementioned measures have been taken.

Article 25 (Storage and Disclosure of Records)
① The Institute Secretariat shall keep records regarding the preliminary investigation, main investigation, and disciplinary action for five (5) years after the conclusion of the investigation and/or disciplinary action.
② The final report may be disclosed after a decision has been made, but information regarding the identities of those involved, including the informant, investigators, witnesses, and consultants, can be omitted if the disclosure of said information may be of disadvantage to the individuals involved.

Chapter 6: Cancellation and Revocation of Authority

Article 26 (Revocation and Withdrawal of Authority)
① In each of the following cases, previously published papers may be canceled or withdrawn ex officio by the president of the society after deliberation by the relevant committee.

1. If the result is unreliable due to honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
2. In case there is a serious error or defect in the overall process or process including submission and review of the thesis

② All authors of the relevant thesis shall be notified of the reason for the revocation or withdrawal of authority, and the information shall be notified on the academic journal or society website.

Article 27 (Detailed Rules of Operation)
Other matters required for Committee operation are separately determined through deliberation by the Committee.

Addendum
1. This Code is implemented as of October 26, 2007.
2. This Code is implemented as of February 13, 2015.
3. This Code is implemented as of August 14, 2020.
4. This Code is implemented as of March 19, 2021.
5. This Code is implemented as of November 26, 2021.