Chapter 1: General Provisions
Article 1 (Purpose)
The purpose of this regulation is to determine all matters with respect to research ethics and misconduct of the researcher of Youngsan Theological Institute (hereinafter "the institute").
Article 2 (Target Individuals)
The regulation is to be applied to all individuals that are directly or indirectly involved in research activities in the institute, that is, all faculty members (faculty members and researchers), students, and contributors to the periodical of the institute (Journal of Youngsan Theology).
Article 3 (Scope of Application)
The provision is applied to the whole range of research proposals, the process of research, the report and publication of the research results, etc. This policy prevails, unless noted in other regulations.
Chapter 2 Roles and Responsibilities of Researchers
Article 4 (Roles and Responsibilities of Researchers)
The researcher shall execute autonomous academic activities based on the freedom of research and comply with the following requirements.
- a. Respect and fair treatment toward the researcher.
- b. Protection of personal information and privacy of the researcher.
- c. Research process, fact-based, candid, and transparent.
- d. Acknowledgement of academic conscience as an expertise when the researcher contributes professional knowledge to society.
- e. Contribution to the development of the discipline through presenting new academic results.
- f. Acknowledgement and respect toward the precedent works of others, for example, by providing references in a proper way when the researcher confers his or her own works or others' works.
- g. Acknowledgement of ethical responsibilities in terms of research contracts and the process of accepting and utilizing of research grants.
- h. Stating in the research findings all the interests involved in research, apart from the interests related to the funding institute.
- i. Participation in ongoing education on research ethics.
Article 5 (Scope of Research Misconduct)
Research misconduct (Hereinafter referred to as misconduct) refers to the following proposed acts occurred during research proposal, research execution, reporting and presenting of the research results, etc:
- a. "Counterfeit" referring to the researcher's misconduct of forging, recording, or reporting raw data or research data or research results which do not actually exist.
- b. "Modulation" having to do with the researcher's act of manipulating the research content or result by purposefully distorting research data, research execution, and so forth or by randomly modifying and deleting raw data or research data.
- c. "Plagiarism," as explained in each proposal below, having to do with the researcher's misconduct of leveraging others' creative ideas or works not general knowledge without displaying them with appropriate sources and of resulting in misguiding the third parties to accept the researcher's work as his or her own creative works.
- 1) Utilizing all or part of others' research content as they are without presenting the sources.
- 2) Not displaying the origin of the sources while using them by modifying some words or sentence structures from others' works.
- 3) Not showing the references of original sources while utilizing others' ingenious ideas and so forth.
- 4) Not displaying the origin of the sources while using others' works through translating.
- d. "Unjust attribution of authorship" dealing with the researcher's misconduct of not attributing authorship without justifiable reason to those who contribute to the research content or result; or the misconduct of granting authorship as an act of gratitude or respect to those who do not contribute to any of the research content or result.
- 1) Granting authorship to the individual although he or she does not contribute to the research content or result.
- 2) Not attributing authorship to the individual although he or she contributes to the research content or result.
- 3) Publishing or presenting the thesis or the dissertation of his or her supervising student as the professor's own and sole research in academic journals.
- e. "Unjust duplicate publication" referring to the researcher's misconduct of receiving grants or having his or her research result acknowledged as a separate research achievement, given that the researcher's work whose result contains the same or substantially similar content to his or her previous research result has been published without mentioning the original source.
- f. "Sabotaging the investigation for the research misconduct" having to do with the researcher's act of intentional interference with the misconduct investigation on his or her own or other's; or with imposing harm on the informer of the misconduct.
- g. Misconduct of severely deviating from the scope commonly accepted in other academia.
- h. Suggesting or forcing others to perform any misconduct above.
Article 6 (Discernment of Research Misconduct)
Misconduct is determined by the following criteria:
- a. Considering whether the act deserves ethical or legal criticisms in academia.
- b. Taking into consideration general standards at the time of the misconduct
- c. Comprehensively examining intentionality of the accused researcher's act, quantity and quality of the misconduct result, conventions and particularities in academia, benefits earned from the misconduct, recognition of the act as well-known misconduct in academia, etc.
Article 7 (Research Ethics Committee)
In order to regulate misconducts, the Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter the committee) is to be established within Youngsan Theological Institute.
Article 8 (Organization and Summon of a Meeting)
- 1. The committee consists of a total of 5, including the chairman.
- 2. The director executes the duties of the chairman.
- 3. Committee members are to be appointed by the director.
- 4. With respect to necessary issues, the committee shall be convened at the request of the director.
- 5. One of the members is obliged to perform necessary administrative tasks.
Article 9 (Term)
The term for committee members is two years. If a seat is vacant, a new member shall be selected to fill the vacancy. In this case, the new member finishes the term of the former member.
Article 10 (Role)
If a misconduct is reported, the committee shall investigate and review the report. The committee shall decide matters pertaining to regulation.
Article 11 (Meeting)
- 1. The committee chair summons and chairs the meeting.
- 2. The meeting is called to order when the majority of members attend. Decisions are valid when the majority of the attendants votes in favor of the decision.
- 3. Paragraphs 1 and 2-4 in Article 32 (on actions and disciplines of the results) are exceptions, where 2/3 of the members must be present for the meeting. An issue shall be decided by 2/3 of those present.
- 4. The committee shall hold closed meetings in principle, but may summon and listen to the opinion(s) of one(s) involved in the issue when necessary.
Chapter 3 Verification of Research Misconduct
Article 12 (Reports and Acceptance of Research Misconduct)
The committee can accept reports through email and/or documents if the informant’s name is noted. Supplemental documents must be received as documents.
Article 13 (Protection of Rights of the Informant)
- 1. The committee shall protect the identity of the informant, and the name of the informant shall not be disclosed.
- 2. Informants who were either already aware of the informant’s report being false or could have known it to be false do not receive the committee’s protection of the identity. The facts regarding the false reports may be reported to the relevant agency/organization.
Article 14 (Protection of the Right of the Subject)
The honor or rights of the subject shall not be infringed until the completion of the investigation. If found to be innocent, the committee shall strive for rehabilitation of the subject.
Article 15 (Principles for Investigating Research Misconduct)
- 1. The committee bears the responsibility to establish whether misconduct was committed. If the subject intentionally destroys or rejects what is requested by the committee, the subject bears the responsibility.
- 2. The committee shall ensure that the informant and the subject are given the right and the opportunity to state their opinions and make a defense/appeal that they deemed necessary by informing them of the relevant procedures and schedules in advance. The content of the report also must be informed to the subject.
- 3. The Director shall endeavor to maintain the independence and impartiality without any undue pressure or interference by the Committee.
Article 16 (Procedures for Investigating Research Misconduct)
- 1. The procedures of “preliminary investigation,” “main investigation” and “decision” must be followed when investigating a misconduct.
- 2. If the chair of the Research Ethics Committee believes that there are sufficient allegations of misconduct, main investigation may be undertaken without the preliminary investigation.
- 3. When the chair of the Research Ethics Committee receives a report of misconduct, he or she shall report the result of the investigation to the organization that the subject belongs to and/or to the academia that published the subject’s work.
Article 17 (Period and Methods of the Preliminary Investigation)
- 1. The preliminary investigation shall be undertaken within 30 days from the date of report and be completed within 60 days from the start of the preliminary investigation. The Committee approves the report.
- 2. The preliminary investigation reviews the following matters:
- a. Whether the report is relevant to Article 5 regarding misconduct.
- b. Whether the report is marked with specificity and clarity that shows the need and benefit of undertaking the main investigation
- c. Whether the date of report exceeds 5 years since the initial date of reckoning
- 3. The chairperson of Research Ethics Committee undertakes preliminary investigation. The chairperson may configure the relevant professional or separate ‘Investigation Committee’ to investigate on his or her behalf.
Article 18 (Report of the Preliminary Investigation)
- 1. Preliminary investigation is a procedure for determining whether to undertake main investigation with respect to allegations of misconduct. It shall be undertaken within 30 days of the report. The chair of Research Ethics Committee decides the form of preliminary investigation autonomously.
- 2. The chair of the Research Ethics Committee may give decision without undertaking the main investigation if the subject admits his misconduct.
- 3. The chair of the Research Ethic Committee may take measures for the preservation of evidence before the Investigation Committee is established if it is determined that there lies a potential for serious damage on the evidences for the investigation.
- 4. The chair of the Research Ethics Committee must inform the informant of the result of the preliminary investigation through written reports within 10 days from the date of the completion of the preliminary investigation. Any reasons for decision not to undertake main investigation shall be included. This does not apply if the informant’s report is anonymous.
- 5. Preliminary investigation report should include the following information:
- a. Content of the informant’s report.
- b. Result of the investigation.
- c. Whether main investigation will be undertaken and the basis of the decision.
- d. Statements of informant and the subject.
- e. Other relevant evidences.
Article 19 (Main Investigation and Its Span)
- 1. The main investigation is a procedure to prove whether misconduct took place. This investigation is initiated within 30 days of the preliminary investigation result of the Research Ethics Committee. An Investigation Committee shall be established during the span of the main investigation.
- 2. The main investigation shall be completed within 180 days of the start of the investigation.
- 3. If the Investigation Committee determines that it cannot complete the investigation within the period mentioned in paragraph 2, it shall explain the reasons to the Research Ethics Committee and may request an extension of 30 days.
Article 20 (Organization of the Investigation Committee)
- 1. The investigation committee shall be composed of 6 or more members. The chair of Research Committee is the chair of the Investigation Committee.
- 2. The establishment of the investigation committee in paragraph 1 shall fulfill all the following criteria:
- a. The ratio of outsiders shall not be less than 30%.
- b. The ratio of professionals in the field of the investigation shall not be less than 50%. At least one of the professionals shall be one of the outsiders.
- 3. Anyone with personal interest in the matter shall not be included in the investigation committee.
Article 21 (The Authority of the Investigation Committee)
- 1. The Investigation Committee can request the attendance of the informant, the subject and other witnesses for their testimonies. The subject must accede to its demand.
- 2. The Investigation Committee can request relevant materials and data to the subject.
Article 22 (Submission of the Result of the Main Investigation)
- 1. The Investigation Committee shall report the result of the investigation to the Research Ethics Committee based on the contents of the complaint and pleading.
- 2. The final report shall include the following information:
- a. The content of the informant’s report.
- b. The result of the investigation.
- c. The list of members of the Investigation Committee.
- d. The role of the subject in the investigation and facts regarding misconduct.
- e. List of relevant evidences, witnesses, and those involved in the investigation.
- f. The testimonies of the informant and the subject.
- g. The decision in accordance with the investigation result.
Article 23 (Result)
- 1. The Research Ethics Committee examines and approves the investigation report. The Research Ethics Committee so informs to the informant and the subject.
- 2. The Research Ethics Committee may vote to decide the approval of the investigation report if a consensus cannot be reached. In this case, majority of the members must vote, and two-thirds of those present must vote in favor of the approval.
Article 24 (Appeals and the Right to Plead)
The informant and the subject have equal protection in their rights to appeal, plead, and give opinions.
Article 25 (Reconsideration)
The informant and the subject can request a reconsideration by stating the reasons through documents to the Committee within 30 days of being notified of the Committee’s decision. The reconsideration shall be completed within 6 months of the request of reconsideration.
Article 26 (Reports to Research Sponsoring Organization)
The final report may be submitted to Research Sponsoring Organizations upon the approval of the Director.
Article 27 (Disciplinary Actions of the Result)
- 1. If deemed necessary, the Committee can proceed disciplinary actions by submitting the investigation report to the Faculty Personnel Committee.
- 2. If the investigation determines it to be a misconduct, the following disciplinary actions may be taken:
- a. Warning.
- b. Disqualify the article.
- c. Restrict article submission for a set period of time.
- d. Report to the head of the institution.
Article 28 (Privacy)
Details of any reports, investigations, reviews, decisions, reconsiderations and actions shall remain confidential. Those who participated in any of the procedures, directly or indirectly, may not disclose any information. If there is a need for proper disclosure of any information, it can be released upon the approval of the Committee.
Article 29 (Budget)
The budget required by the Research Ethics Committee may be provided through separate appropriation.
- 1. This regulation shall enter into force upon the approval of the Executive Committee of Youngsan Theological Institute.
- 2. This regulation shall enter into force on September 1, 2009.
- 3. This revised regulation shall enter into force on June 8, 2012.
- 4. This revised regulation shall enter into force on May 28, 2013.
- 5. This revised regulation shall enter into force on February 18, 2016.