The purpose of this regulation is to establish research ethics verification standards and establish research ethics in relation to research activities conducted by the Korean Society of Emotional & Behavioral Disorders (hereinafter referred to as the "Society").

This regulation applies to the ｢Journal of Emotional & Behavioral Disorders｣ Research published by this society, papers published in academic conferences, and other publications.

This regulation is enacted and revised by the board of directors of this society, and the editorial committee deliberates, examines, and verifies the submitted papers in accordance with the research ethics regulations.

• 1.
  Research cheating (hereinafter referred to as "cheating") This refers to the act of not complying with the ethical virtues of researchers, and refers to forgery, modulation, plagiarism, unfair author, unfair duplicate publication, sculpture publication, research fraud, etc. conducted in research proposal, research performance, report and presentation.

  • 1) The term "forgery" means the act of making, recording, or reporting false research data, research results, etc. that do not exist.
  • 2) The term "modulation" means the act of distorting the contents or results of a study by artificially manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, etc. or arbitrarily modifying or deleting the original research data or research data.
  • 3)
    The term "plagiarism" means the act of making a third party recognize as if it were his or her own creation by utilizing original ideas or creations of others other than general knowledge without indicating appropriate sources as follows.

    • A. Where all or part of another person's research is used as it is without indicating the source
    • B. Where the source is not indicated while partially modifying and using the word and sentence structure of another person's work
    • C. Where the source is not indicated while utilizing other people's original thoughts, etc
    • D. Where the source is not indicated while translating and utilizing other people's works
  • 4)
    "Unjustifiable author indication" refers to the act of granting author qualification to a person who has contributed or contributed to research contents or results without justifiable reason, or for expressing gratitude or courtesy to a person who has not contributed or contributed.

    • A. Where author qualification is granted even though there is no contribution or contribution to the contents or results of the study
    • B. Where the author is not qualified even though there is a contribution or contribution to the research content or results
    • C. Where a student's thesis is published and published in an academic journal, etc. under the sole name of an advisor
  • 5) "Unfair duplicate publication" refers to the act of obtaining unfair profits, such as receiving research funds or receiving separate research recognition after a researcher publishes the same or substantially similar work as his/her previous research results without indicating the source.
  • 6)The term "piece publication" means the act of dividing and writing into several independent papers using only a part of the data obtained by applying the same assumption or methodology.
  • 7)The term "interference of investigation into research irregularities" means an act of deliberately interfering with the investigation of a person or another person's irregularities or harming the informant.
  • 8)The act of suggesting, forcing, or threatening another person to commit the aforementioned misconduct.
  • 9)Other acts that are seriously outside the scope generally accepted in each academic field.
• 2.The term "informer" refers to a person who has notified the plenary session or research support agency of the fact that he/she recognized cheating or related evidence. However, a person who performs this intentionally or by gross negligence is not regarded as an informant.
• 3.The term "investigated person" refers to a person who is the subject of a report or a person who is presumed to have cheated while conducting an investigation.
• 4.'Preliminary investigation' refers to collecting relevant information on reported facts and performing preliminary fact-checking procedures to determine whether to conduct this investigation./li>
• 5."This investigation" refers to an official investigation and evaluation of all related facts conducted to determine whether there is a fraud, the person responsible for it, and the degree of fraud.

• 1. Based on the Korea Research Foundation (KCI) literature similarity system, a paper with a plagiarism rate of more than 15% based on the criteria for matching at least 5 words and 1 sentence (excluding citation and source sentences and references)
• 2.A paper that does not comply with the submitted manuscript format of the regulations of this association or has a large number of spelling and translation errors, reducing the effectiveness of plagiarism tests
• 3. A paper that includes a third party other than a student and an advisor as co-authors as the author of a paper that organized and submitted a thesis. However, exceptions are made when the contribution thesis contains a number of different contents from the thesis and the contribution of the third author to the academic society is explained
• 4. A paper that summarizes the contributor's thesis and submits it without marking it separately. However, exceptions are made when notes or footnotes of the text are indicated that the thesis is summarized
• 5. A paper co-written by a family (parents, children, couples, etc.). However, exceptions are made when a family member has obtained a master's degree or higher related to the thesis subject
• 6. A paper written by citing other people's research reports or thesis

• 1. When publishing journals, holding academic conferences, managing research achievements, etc., author information of related research results shall be checked and managed, and when requested by the Minister of Education or the head of a specialized institution, he/she shall actively cooperate.
• 2. When the Minister of Education, specialized institutions, universities, etc. request an investigation or data on the suspicion of research irregularities recognized or reported by the academic society, it shall be strictly investigated.

• 1. Researchers should be honest in their research. In other words, it should be honest throughout the research process, such as deriving ideas, designing experiments, analyzing experiments and results, supporting research funds, publishing research results, and fair compensation for research participants.
• 2. Researchers should consider counterfeiting, tampering, plagiarism, unfair author labeling, unfair duplicate publication, and sculpture publication in research as serious research irregularities, and do their best to prevent such irregularities from occurring.
• 3. If there is a case of suspected misconduct under paragraph 2 of this Article, the researcher shall report it to the society in an appropriate manner.
• 4. If there is a possibility of conflict or conflict between one's interests and the interests of another person or other institution, the researcher shall publicize and respond appropriately.

• 1. Researchers should work as openly as possible for the development of academics and technologies to the extent that their research secrets are protected.
• 2. If there is a request from another researcher after the research results are published, research-related data and results should be actively provided to the extent permitted by intellectual property rights or restrictions on research.

• 1. Authors listed in published research results, such as papers, should be able to fulfill their responsibilities by familiarizing themselves with the contents of the research, and should not grant author's authority to those who do not contribute.
• 2.Official collaborators or people who have contributed directly or indirectly to the writing of publications should be appropriately compensated according to the method displayed in the paper, etc.
• 3. The researcher who directly conducted the major research as the person with the highest contribution to the research should be the first author, the researcher in charge of research and communication should be the corresponding author, and the contribution should be evenly distributed by dividing the researchers in any other field into co-authors.

• 1. When presenting research results, the researcher must clearly indicate the researcher's affiliation, position, contact information, and e-mail in the paper publication application.
• 2.In the case of minors (students belonging to elementary and secondary schools) whose authors are not currently affiliated, the final school, position, and year of enrollment should be clearly indicated and submitted.

• 1. In order to deliberate on matters related to research ethics, the Research Ethics Deliberation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the "Committee") shall be established within the society, and detailed deliberation and decision shall be made on whether research is fraudulent and the results thereof.
• 2. The Committee shall be comprised of not more than 20 deliberative members, including the chairperson of the editorial committee as ex officio.
• 3. The chairman of the Research Ethics Committee shall be the editor-in-chief as an ex officio member, and the vice-chairperson and executive secretary shall be elected by the Committee.
• 4. Deliberative members shall be appointed by the Chairperson, and the term of office of deliberative members shall be four years, but they may be reappointed.
• 5. In principle, details and procedures related to "verification of research irregularities" shall be implemented in accordance with the "Guidelines for Securing Research Ethics" (Ministry of Education Order No. 263, July 17, 2018, partially amended).

• 1. The Committee shall convene if deemed necessary by the Chairperson.
• 2. The Committee shall be established with the attendance of a majority of the incumbent members and shall be resolved with the consent of a majority of the members present. However, the power of attorney is recognized as attendance at the establishment of this committee, but voting rights are not granted.
• 3. Deliberative members who are involved in research subject to deliberation by the Committee shall not participate in deliberation related to the research.
• 4. If necessary for deliberation, the Chairperson may request the research manager or the management manager to submit or report data.
• 5. The deliberation committee member shall observe the confidentiality of all matters related to deliberation.

• 1. Matters concerning research ethics raised for papers, plans, reports, etc. related to academic societies
• 2. Matters concerning research ethics and education in research and technology development
• 3. Matters concerning the safety of subjects, personal information protection, and damage compensation
• 4. Good faith accusations raised regarding the honesty of all research related to the academic society
• 5. Other matters concerning research ethics referred by the Chairperson.

• 1. The Research Ethics Deliberation Committee is in charge of deliberation and decision on the facts of the alleged informative or recognized research fraud.
• 2. The decision on whether or not the allegations of informative or recognized research misconduct are true shall be decided with the attendance of a majority of the deliberation committee members and the approval of a majority of the members.
• 3. Deliberative members who have an interest in the case of suspected research irregularities are excluded from the deliberation and decision process.
• 4. The deadline for determining research irregularities is six months. In other words, it refers to the deadline from reporting research irregularities to preliminary investigations after the plenary session's own discovery, to deliberation and decision after convening the committee. The suspect's objection to the decision must be filed within 30 days, and the same shall be completed within the six-month verification prescription period. Provided, That if it is deemed difficult to conduct an investigation within this period, the reason for the investigation may be notified to the informant and the investigated person, and the investigation period may be extended.

• 1.
  Research irregularities are judged based on the following criteria.

  • 1) Considering whether the behavior is ethically or legally reprehensible in the academic field to which the researcher belongs
  • 2) Considering the 'guidelines for securing research ethics' at the time of the relevant act and the general standards at the time of the act
  • 3) Comprehensively considering the intention of the researcher, the amount and quality of the results of research cheating, the practices and specificities of academia, and the benefits obtained through research cheating
• 2. It is determined as the basic standard determined by the committee according to the criteria for determining research irregularities.

• 1. Even if it is a paper that has been confirmed to be published, the publication is suspended until the committee decides.
• 2.When the Research Ethics Deliberation Committee deliberates or decides on research fraud, the chairman of the editorial committee shall take all or part of the disciplinary measures presented in paragraph 3 according to the severity thereof.
• 3.
  Details of disciplinary action

  • 1) Delete this paper from the journal thesis list
  • 2) Prohibition of thesis contributors for the next three years
  • 3) Announcement of the contents on the conference website
  • 4) Notification to the Korea Research Foundation
  • 5) Notify your organization of this information
  • 6) a three-year suspension of academic credentials for thesis contributors
  • 7) Warnings and cautionary actions for thesis contributors
• 4. Papers that have been finally determined for research fraud should be kept in the society for five years based on the time when processing is completed.
• 5. In the process of investigating research fraud, it must go through a process such as a researcher's explanation, and if it is finally confirmed that there is a fraud, the publication of the paper shall be canceled as soon as possible upon the committee's resolution. In addition, matters other than the above shall be carried out according to the resolution of the Committee.
• 6.If the investigation confirms that there has been no research fraud, the Commission may take appropriate follow-up measures to restore the honor of the accused or suspect.

• 1. In principle, the study subjects should fully explain the purpose of the study and potential mental, physical, and other risks that may occur during or after the study, and the research shall specify the facts agreed on.
• 2. If it is difficult for the study subject to decide whether to agree or not, specify that he/she has obtained consent from the study subject's guardian.
• 3. It should be sufficiently explained that the subject of the study can withdraw his/her intention to participate at any time while participating in the study.
• 4. Appropriate measures should be taken to prevent information that enables the study subject to be identified from being included in the publication.
• 5. In the case of human studies, it is recommended to conduct the study after obtaining prior approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the agency.

• 1. Editorial committee members and judges should exclude personal interests and handle them fairly in the process of receiving and reviewing papers.
• 2. The judges shall conduct a fair and reasonable examination based on conscience and professional knowledge. A sound evaluation should be conducted by openly accepting and respecting various research perspectives and methods.
• 3. Editorial members and judges shall not disclose to the outside what they have learned in the process of receiving and reviewing papers.

When submitting a paper, the contributor must sign and submit a confirmation of the comprehensive results of the literature similarity of the Korea Research Foundation (KCI), a consent form for the transfer of copyright at the plenary session, and an author's statement.

Those who have been confirmed to publish the paper must submit a certificate of completion of research ethics education issued by institutions and organizations related to research ethics education and a checklist for submitting papers at the plenary session.

Matters other than those prescribed in this Regulation shall be determined through a resolution of the board of directors of the plenary session.

• Supplementary Provisions (No. 1) These Regulations shall come into force on 1st of July in 2007.
• Supplementary Provisions (No. 2) These Regulations shall come into force on 1st of September in 2016.
• Supplementary Provisions (No. 3) These Regulations shall come into effect on 1st of April in 2019.
• Supplementary Provisions (No. 4) These Regulations shall come into effect on 1st of December in 2019.
• Supplementary Provisions (No. 5) These Regulations shall come into force on 1st of January in 2021.