K-Heritage Review - Research ethics regulations

Research Ethics Regulations of the Institute for Cultural Heritage

Established: December 1, 2018
1st Revision: March 16, 2026

Article 1 (Purpose)

The purpose of these Research Ethics Regulations is to establish research ethics for researchers associated with academic presentations, the journal K-Heritage Review (hereinafter referred to as the "Journal"), and various academic publications of the Research Institute of Cultural Heritage at Chungbuk National University (hereinafter referred to as the "Institute"). It aims to prevent research misconduct and establish principles and standards for the fair verification of research integrity when misconduct occurs.

Article 2 (Operation)

These regulations shall be operated in compliance with international academic publishing ethics standards and the general research ethics principles of the academic community.

Article 3 (Ethical Obligations of Researchers)

A. Researchers wishing to present at the Institute's academic events or publish in the Journal or other publications must be well-informed of these regulations and submit only research results that ensure integrity.
B. When citing public academic materials, researchers must provide accurate information and clearly specify the source.
C. Materials obtained through personal channels may only be cited after obtaining explicit consent from the information provider.
D. Researchers bear full responsibility for the research results they publish.
E. Researchers shall not submit manuscripts to other institutions or journals while they are under review by the Institute (Prohibition of Duplicate Submission).
F. Researchers must clearly disclose any potential conflicts of interest (research funding, personal relationships, financial interests, etc.) during the submission process.
G. Researchers must maintain records of research data and analysis processes for reproducibility and verifiability and must provide them upon reasonable request from the Editorial Board or the academic community.
H. If Generative AI was used in the writing process, researchers must disclose its use and scope. Generative AI cannot be listed as an author, and researchers bear full responsibility for the accuracy and ethical integrity of AI-generated content.
I. To prevent self-plagiarism, researchers must provide appropriate citations not only for the works of others but also for their own previous research.

Article 4 (Ethical Obligations of Editorial Board Members)

A. Editorial Board members must handle all submitted manuscripts objectively and fairly, ensuring no disputes regarding impartiality arise between authors and reviewers.
B. If an Editorial Board member submits their own manuscript, they must be completely recused from the review and editorial process of that specific manuscript.
C. Editorial Board members must not disclose the review process or results to external parties under any circumstances.
D. Editorial Board members must immediately notify the Research Ethics Committee if any research ethics issues are discovered during their duties.
E. Editorial Board members must recuse themselves if they have a personal or academic conflict of interest with an author.
F. Evaluation of manuscripts must be based solely on academic value, originality, validity of methodology, and academic contribution, without discrimination based on the author's affiliation, gender, nationality, or academic status.

Article 5 (Ethical Obligations of Reviewers)

A. Reviewers must conduct a faithful and fair evaluation of the assigned manuscript based on academic conscience and objective standards.
B. Reviewers cannot reject a manuscript without providing sufficient grounds simply because the author's views conflict with their personal academic opinions.
C. Reviewers must not disclose or privately use the contents of a manuscript until it is officially published in the Journal.
D. Reviewers must respect the dignity of the author in the language used in the review report.
E. Reviewers must immediately inform the Editorial Board and recuse themselves if a conflict of interest with the author is identified.

Article 6 (Scope of Research Misconduct)

Research misconduct refers to the following acts as defined in Article 11 of the Ministry of Education's "Guidelines for Securing Research Ethics":

A. Fabrication: Creating false raw data, research data, or results that do not exist.
B. Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or arbitrarily changing or deleting raw data to distort the research content or results.
C. Plagiarism: Using someone else's original ideas or creations without proper attribution, leading others to perceive them as one's own work.
D. Unfair Author Attribution: Failing to grant authorship to those who made significant contributions or granting authorship to those who did not contribute (e.g., gift authorship, ghost authorship).
E. Unfair Duplicate Publication: Publishing work identical or substantially similar to one's previous research without citation to gain unfair benefits, such as research funding or academic credit.
F. Obstruction of Misconduct Investigation: Intentionally hindering an investigation into one's own or another's misconduct or harming a whistleblower.
G. Inappropriate Use of AI: Manipulating research content using generative AI or re-writing others' work through AI without proper attribution.
H. Any other acts that seriously deviate from the commonly accepted range in each academic field.

Article 7 (Reporting Research Misconduct)

A. Anyone who suspects research misconduct related to the Institute's publications or presentations may report the subject and reasons in writing and request an investigation.
B. Whistleblowers may report under their real name or anonymously, and the Institute shall take necessary measures to protect the identity of the whistleblower.

Article 8 (Establishment and Composition of the Research Ethics Committee)

A. Upon receiving a report of research misconduct, a Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the "Committee") shall be formed immediately.
B. The Director of the Institute shall appoint the Chairperson of the Committee.
C. The Committee shall consist of approximately five members, including the Chairperson. To ensure objectivity, at least one external member (not affiliated with the University or Institute) shall be included.
D. The Chairperson recommends members to be appointed by the Director. Experts from other fields may be appointed if necessary, but individuals who may influence the fairness of the deliberation are excluded.

Article 9 (Functions of the Committee)

A. The Committee shall initiate an investigation by securing sufficient evidence regarding the report.
B. The Committee shall deliberate and decide whether misconduct occurred and determine the scope of sanctions for the person under investigation.

Article 10 (Deliberation Period)

A. Deliberation shall commence within 15 days of the report and be completed within 30 days of the start of deliberation.
B. If necessary, the period may be extended by Committee resolution, but the deliberation must be completed within 3 months of the initial report.

Article 11 (Protection of Rights of Whistleblowers and Respondents)

A. The Committee must protect the identities of whistleblowers and respondents. The whistleblower's name shall not be disclosed unless absolutely necessary and with their consent.
B. The Committee must not disclose the contents of the report to external parties until a final decision is reached.
C. The Committee must provide equal opportunities for statements, objections, and defense to both the whistleblower and the respondent.
D. If the respondent is found not guilty, the Committee shall endeavor to restore their reputation.

Article 12 (Opportunity for Explanation)

The respondent must be given a sufficient opportunity to explain, and the method may be public or private according to the respondent's preference.

Article 13 (Decision and Sanctions)

A. The Chairperson shall notify the whistleblower and respondent of the decision and reasons in writing within 10 days of the final ruling.
B. The following sanctions shall be applied to authors found to have committed research misconduct:
- Cancellation of publication and removal of the manuscript from online databases.
- Prohibition of submission to the Journal for 5 years from the date of the ruling.
- Posting of the misconduct and measures taken on the Institute's website and in the Journal.
- Notification of details to the relevant research funding agency if the research was funded.
C. In the case of duplicate submission, a 5-year ban on submissions shall be imposed.
D. If research misconduct is confirmed, the Committee shall officially notify the respondent's affiliated institution of the results.

Article 14 (Appeals and Re-deliberation)

A. Whistleblowers or respondents may file an appeal in writing within 30 days of receiving notice of the decision.
B. The Committee shall decide whether to re-deliberate within 10 days of receiving the appeal.
C. If re-deliberation is decided, it must be completed within 60 days of the appeal's receipt.

Article 15 (Detailed Rules)

Matters not specified in these regulations shall follow general academic customs. In case of suspected ethics violations not explicitly stated here, the Committee shall convene at the Chairperson's request to make a decision.

Addenda

(1) These regulations were enacted on December 1, 2018.
(2) These regulations shall take effect on March 16, 2026.

Enacted: December 1, 2018
Revised (1st): March 16, 2026