한국자원공학회

Code of Research Ethics

Enactment: November 15, 2007
First Amendment: October 02, 2008
Second Amendment: December 09, 2009
Third Amendment: January 01, 2013
Fourth Amendment: January 18, 2018

Fifth Amendment: March 23, 2020

Sixth Amendment: October 27, 2022

Article1 (Purpose).
This code of research ethics (“Code”) lays out a set of general principles and directives with a view to ensuring basic practice of research ethics for the publications of the Korean Society of Mineral and Energy Resources Engineers (“Society”).

Article2 (Subject of Application).
The Code shall apply to all researchers participating in academic activities hosted by the Society, such as conferences and publication activities including its journal, research projects, and educational projects.

Article3 (Scope of Application).
The scope of the research ethics of the Society shall be determined by the Code, except for cases governed by special provisions of an overriding law of a government regarding the ethics and integrity of a specific research field.

Article4 (Scope of Research Misconduct).
Research misconduct (“Misconduct”) within the meaning of the Code refers to fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and inappropriate authorship assignment committed in relation to the proposal, conduct, and presentation of a project, and the presentation, submission, and publication of an article, as specified in the clauses below.
①“Fabrication” is the construction of research data or results that never occurred.
②“Falsification” is the distortion of research data or results by willfully manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or arbitrarily changing or omitting data or results.
③“Plagiarism” is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, data, or results without receiving proper permission or providing appropriate citation.
④“Duplicate publication” is the act of publishing papers in this journal that have been published in domestic and international academic journals.
⑤“Inappropriate authorship assignment” is the failure to assign authorship of a paper to a person who has made scholarly or technical contributions to the research data or results without a justifiable reason, or inappropriately assigning authorship of a paper to a person who has not made any scholarly or technical contributions as a token of gratitude or courtesy.
Authorship must be given to any author who is expected to have substantial contributions to the conception or design of the research work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the research work, AND drafting the research work or revising it critically for important intellectual content, AND final approval of the version to be published, AND agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the research work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the research work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
⑥An act which intentionally interferes with the investigation of a violation suspected to have been committed by oneself or others, or harming or threatening the informant.
⑦An act which seriously deviating from the practices commonly accepted in the scholarly community.
⑧All other misbehaviors judged to require inspective or preventive measures at the Society level.

Article5 (Protection of Informant’s Right)
①“The Informant” refers to a person who informs the Society of the fact or provides the substantive evidence of the Misconduct known to him/her.
②The Informant may provide information in any conceivable form, oral or written, by phone or email, using his/her real name as a matter of principle; provided, however, that any case in which an anonymous provision of information includes the project or paper title accompanied by details and substantive evidence of concrete misbehavior sent by post or email shall be treated as information provided under the real name.
③Any information related to the Informant’s identity shall not be disclosed, and the Society shall make efforts to protect the Informant from being disadvantaged for the fact that one reported the Misconduct.
④The Informant shall have the right to request that the Society provides information on the ongoing investigation procedure, schedule, etc. after reporting the Misconduct.

Article6 (Protection of Examinee’s Rights)
①“The Examinee” refers to a person who is investigated under suspicion of having committed the Misconduct reported to, or recognized by, the Society, or under suspicion of being involved in the Misconduct as uncovered during the course of the investigation. Individuals summoned to the investigative committee as testifiers or witnesses are not considered examinees.
②The Society shall make efforts to protect the Examinee from having one’s honor or rights unjustly infringed upon during the course of the investigation.
③The Society shall not disclose any suspicions raised about the Misconduct prior to a confirmed outcome from the investigation.
④The Examinee shall have the right to request the Society provides information about the ongoing investigation into the Misconduct, procedures, and schedules, etc.

Article7 (Composition and Authority of Research Ethics Committee).
The Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Committee”) of the Society shall be subordinate to the Board of Directors. The Committee Chair shall be appointed by the President of the Society from among the Vice-Presidents and shall elect five to ten Committee Members from among the editors. The Examinee shall be excluded from the list of candidates for the Chair or Members of the Committee. The Committee shall be able to request the attendance of the Informant, the Examinee, witnesses, and testifiers, and to present preparation materials for the affidavit. The Examinee shall not have the right to decline such a request.

Article8 (Investigation and Report of Research Misconduct).
Upon receipt of a research ethics issue in relation to the academic activities of the Society, the President of the Society shall notify the Committee of the issue with the request for investigation. The Committee shall investigate the Misconduct and report the results within six months, whereby the following items must be included in all cases:
①Details of the reported Misconduct
②The Misconduct to be investigated
③List of Committee Members and meeting minutes
④Scope of the Misconduct in the study concerned, and outcome of the investigation
⑤Related evidence and witnesses

Article9 (Principle of Verification).
The Committee shall have the obligation to verify whether the Misconduct is true or not, shall guarantee the Informant and the Examinee’s equal rights and opportunities to state their respective opinions, to raise objection, and to defend themselves, and shall notify them of related procedures in advance. Furthermore, the Board of Directors shall make efforts to ensure that the independence and impartiality of the Committee is upheld.

Article10 (Follow-up Measures on Investigation Report).
If the Misconduct turns out to be non-existent, the Society shall take appropriate the follow-up measures to restore the honor and reputation of the researcher concerned. If, on the contrary, the Misconduct is confirmed, this shall be published and each of the follow-up measures listed below shall be taken in accordance with the gravity of the Misconduct, whereby the related decision shall be made by the Board of Directors:
①Request for cancellation or modification of the research results
②Cancellation of the publication of the research results (In the case of a published study, official notice for cancellation shall be sent to the pertinent institution.)
③Suspension of membership for an adequate period
④Removal of the name from the membership list
⑤Report to the pertinent law enforcement body

Article11 (Others).
Any provisions not specified in the Code shall be handled in accordance with the resolution by the Board of Directors.

By-law

Article1 (Date of Enforcement).
Article1(Date of Enforcement). This Code shall come into force on the date of enactment.

학술지

Code of Research Ethics

By-law