The purpose of this ethics statement is to establish the desirable environment for all the members in Korean Academy of Audiology to perform ethically sound and desirable research and to edit and issue the 「Audiology and Speech Research」 that is appropriate in research ethics statement.

1. Targets for application

This regulation is applied to all who prefers to publish the paper in 「Audiology and Speech Research」 and members of Korea Academy of Audiology.

2. Regulations of fraudulent acts in research

1) Definition: Research fraudulent act indicates behaviors in ‘2) types’ conducted on the proposal of research development assignment, performance of research and development, and report and presentation of results of research and development, and definition of each type is as follows. Behaviors relevant to the following types are relevant to the fraudulent acts in this academic paper and are submitted to the research ethics committee.

2) Types of research fraudulent act

(1) Forge: Untruthful behavior for creating data or research results that are non-existent
(2) Falsification: Behaviors for artificially adjusting the research materials, devices, and procedures, randomly changing or deleting the data, and distorting the contents or results of the research
(3) Plagiarism: Behaviors for copying the ideas of others or contents and results of research without valid approval or quote
(4) Inappropriate indication of authors: Behaviors for not granting the qualifications as an author for those who directly contribute to the contents or results of the research without valid reasons or granting qualifications as an author to those for appreciation or courtesy even if they have not contributed to the research
(5) Duplicated publication: Behaviors for re-editing the previously published papers and publishing them or proceeding duplicated publication of papers already submitted to other academic journal
(6) Illegal modification of paper: Behaviors for deleting or adding the name of authors by personally contacting the publishing agents without valid procedures from editing committee for the papers decided to be published or changing the contents
(7) Official false statement: Behaviors of providing false statement on the academic background, experience, and research accomplishment of one when submitting the paper
(8) Self-plagiarism: Behaviors of using the significant amount of his/her own work without revealing the source including the case for publishing the papers with similar topics in other academic journal
(9) Editing committee is convened for the review in case of behaviors that are severely beyond the acceptable scope or if particular judgment is required, and research ethics committee is established if there is a source of problem and determine whether to publish the paper

3) If there is a person who made small contribution to the research but is difficult to be included in the co-author in regard of an issue of ‘false indication of author,’ it is available to indicate the his/her contribution on the acknowledgement.

4) Researchers need to prohibit from following matters to prevent self-plagiarism.

(1) Use his/her own research results that have not been published when preparing for the paper
(2) Behaviors for publishing or releasing works that are identical or similar with his/her previous work and using them as his/her research result, accomplishment, or achievement
(3) If researcher wants to use his/her previous research results, they are allowed to use them after obtaining approval from editor or issuer of the academic journal that was firstly published or by indicating the quote.

5) Allowance of duplicated indication: If parts of the paper are published in the general academic journal, newly submitted paper shall include the extended contents other than the previously published contents, and this shall be notified in the submitted paper. Decision is made by review from editing committee based on the regulations. If there is an issue, research ethics committee is convened to decide whether to publish the paper.

3. Verification of violation in research fraudulent act

1) Rights of informant

(1) Informant indicates a person who notifies the fact or proof of fraudulent act to this committee.
(2) Informant shall reveal his/her name in principle, but anonymous report is processed in the same manner for the report under real name if it includes accurate contents and proofs of fraudulent act.
(3) If report is accepted, editing committee chair shall convene editing committee judging whether it is fraudulent act and also calling for research ethics committee for the investigation of research ethics violation behaviors.
(4) Identity of informant shall be completely protected in principle.
(5) Informant is eligible to request the investigation procedures and schedules to the committee after reporting fraudulent, and committee shall sincerely correspond with them.

2) Configuration and right of research ethics committee

(1) Research ethics committee is comprised of five members in principles, and committee chair is elected by mutual votes of members.
(2) Research ethics committee is eligible to request those to be considered to submit data and also preserve research resource of related person who violates research ethics by obtaining the approval from the committee chair.
(3) Research ethics committee is eligible to suggest follow-up measures on those who violate research ethics fraudulent act that turn out to be true to the committee chair.

3) Targets for consideration

(1) Those to be considered indicate people who are to be investigated for fraudulent act from the report or recognition of the committee, and witness or testifier is not included.
(2) As for suspicion of fraudulent act, identity of those to be considered shall not be disclosed until the judgment is given, and reputation or right of members to be considered shall not be infringed during the verification procedures.
(3) Editing committee shall guarantee the opportunity of enough explanation to those to be considered.
(4) Those to be considered are eligible to request investigation procedures and schedules in proceedings to the committee, and charging organization shall sincerely correspond with them.

4) Judgment

(1) Research ethics committee shall determine the procedures based on the objection or contents from explanation.
(2) Judgment from research ethics fraudulent act is determined by the agreement two thirds of members in the research ethics committee or more.

4. Measures on violation of research fraudulent act

1) Measures on violation of research ethics

(1) If it turns out that research ethics have been violated, following measures can be taken upon the call of committee chair.
     ① Delete from the list of academic journal/paper (KCI, research record, and homepage, etc.)
     ② Limit on submission for the next 3 years from the period when judgment is given
     ③ Notify violation (National Research Foundation of Korea, homepage of this committee, and organization chair of submitter)
     ④ Warning and caution on violator

2) Prescription, record, and preservation of investigation

(1) Even if violating behaviors are received five years before the date of receiving the report, they are not processed.
(2) However, if investigated person re-quotes the results directly from the paper and use them for activities related to research within 5 years (research planning, application of research fund, and performance of research, etc.), they shall be processed even if they are from five years ago.
(3) Record and preservation of investigation
     ① Research institute in charge of investigation shall save all the records in the investigation procedures in the form of document, voice, and video.
     ② Investigation record shall be preserved for more than five years in principles.

5. Ethics of editing members and judging committee

(1) Editing members or judging committee members shall fairly process the receipt, review, and publication procedures of paper without personal school ties or regionalism.
(2) Editing members or judging committee members shall not disclose information they obtain from receipt, review, and publication procedures of paper.
(3) Editing members or judging committee members shall be educated with research ethics on a regular basis and submit the proofs to the research ethics committee chair.

6. Among the papers submitted in this academic journal, those researching for the humans or material objects or dealing with embryo or genes, they need to follow ‘laws about life ethics and safety (abbreviation: bio ethics law),” obtain the approval from research organization, and publish the numbers to the paper. If failing to obtain the approval from research organization, it is required to indicate what received written agreement from research subjects in principles and reviewed by the editing committee.

7. Researcher shall submit the written oath with paper on the research ethics when submitting the paper.

8. Other issues are applied with ‘instructions for acquiring research ethics’ from the department of education.