Chapter 1 General Provisions

Article 1

This Committee shall be referred to as the Ethics Committee of the Korean Association of English Language and Literature Education.

Article 2

This Committee shall be established in accordance with Chapter 6 of the Bylaws of the Korean Association of English Language and Literature Education.

Article 3

(Purpose) The Operating Regulations of the Ethics Committee of the Korean Association of English Language and Literature Education (hereinafter "Committee") aim to regulate necessary matters when executive members and members of the association are accused of violating ethical principles.

Chapter 2 Composition and Operation

Article 4 (Composition)

1.The Ethics Committee shall be established and operated with around 10 members including the chairperson.

2.The appointment of Ethics Committee members shall be elected by the previous Executive Committee meeting among those recommended by at least 5 regular members.

3.The term of office for the Chairperson and members of the Ethics Committee shall be 2 years.

4.The Secretary of the Ethics Committee shall be the General Manager of the Association and shall not have voting rights.

Article 5 (Operation)

1.The Ethics Committee deliberates on whether the Code of Ethics has been violated by members referred to it and may establish rules as necessary.

2.The Ethics Committee must deliberate and decide within 30 days from the date of receipt of the case referred to it, following the deliberation procedures of other committees within the Association.

3.Types of discipline such as expulsion, qualification suspension, public apology, etc., are determined by the decision of the Ethics Committee.

Article 6 (Filing for Violations of the Code of Ethics and Plagiarism Regulations)

1. To file with the Ethics Committee, signatures of at least 20 regular members are required.

2. Executives and members accused of violating the Code of Ethics must cooperate with the investigation conducted by the Ethics Committee of the Association.

3. In cases of confirmed plagiarism in papers by the Editorial Committee, the Editorial Committee shall refer the case to the Ethics Committee for determination of sanctions.

Article 7 (Opportunity for Explanation and Confidentiality)

1. Until confirmed, those accused of violating the Code of Ethics by the Ethics Committee are presumed not to have violated the Code.

2. Those accused of violating the Code of Ethics by the Ethics Committee must be given sufficient opportunity to explain themselves.

3. Until a decision is made, the Ethics Committee shall not disclose the identity of the parties involved to the public.

Article 8 (Amendment of Operating Regulations of the Ethics Committee)

Amendments to the Operating Regulations of the Ethics Committee shall follow the procedures for amending the Bylaws of the Association.

Chapter 3 Code of Ethics

The Code of Ethics of the Association sets forth ethical principles and standards that members and executives of the Association must adhere to in fulfilling their roles to achieve the objectives of the Association and promote personal ethics.

Article 9

The President, Vice President, and other executives of the Association must perform their duties fairly and conscientiously in accordance with the various business and other matters stipulated in the Operating Regulations of the Association.

Article 10

The President and Vice President of the Association shall not engage in activities contrary to the founding purposes of the Association or jeopardize the political neutrality of the Association.

Article 11

Members of the Association must contribute to the development of English education and public welfare through their activities within the Association.

Article 12

Members of the Association must adhere to ethical integrity and academic conscience in educational, research activities, and participation in reality.

Article 13

Members of the Association must not present parts of other people's research or arguments as their own in papers or publications and must respect the copyrights of others.

Article 14

Members who conduct research-related evaluations and consultations must impartially evaluate based on academic conscience and maintain confidentiality as necessary regarding the submitter and submission content.

Article 15

Members of the Association must not seek unfair or inappropriate gains using information acquired through research activities.

Article 16

The Research Ethics Committee must conduct offline and online research ethics education for Association members at least once a year.

Chapter 4 Principles of Research Ethics

Article 17 Responsibilities of Researchers

1. Researchers must conduct research autonomously, creatively, and truthfully.

2. Researchers must conduct research based on facts, conduct honest and transparent research, and accept criticism from other researchers.

3. Researchers must protect the personal information and privacy of research subjects, respect their dignity, and treat them fairly.

4. Researchers must not present another researcher's research as their own results.

5. Researchers must make efforts to prevent research ethics violations and must be aware of the existence and content of plagiarism prevention guidelines.

6. Researchers must use plagiarism detection services such as KCI (Korea Citation Index) to verify plagiarism when submitting papers.

Article 18 Principles of Collaboration Research Ethics

1. Researchers must mention all relevant individuals and institutions that have contributed to publishing a paper in academic journals.

2. Researchers must not distort their and their colleagues' academic and professional qualifications when publishing papers.

3. Researchers conducting collaborative research must exclude discrimination or favoritism based on gender, race, religion, age, etc., unrelated to academics and treat participants fairly.

4. Violations of collaborative research ethics are handled according to the decision of the Research Ethics Committee.

Article 19 Principles of Human Subject Research Ethics

1. Research involving humans as subjects or methods involving human subjects must be socially and ethically acceptable.

2. Researchers must ensure that research is not conducted unethically in the process and handling of research results.

3. Researchers must explain the research procedures thoroughly to participants, including potential discomfort or risks, and detailed experimental procedures if experiments are necessary.

4. If participants have doubts about the research process, they should be given the opportunity to ask questions.

5. Participants should be informed that they can withdraw their consent at any time and it is acceptable to discontinue participation in the research.

6. Researchers must ensure that the use of monetary compensation for participants does not distort the purpose, direction, and results of the research.

Chapter 5 Types and Handling of Research Misconduct

Article 20 Definition and Types of Research Misconduct

The definition of research misconduct includes falsification, fabrication, plagiarism, improper authorship, duplicate publication, and simultaneous submission, among others, in the proposal, execution, and reporting of research and development projects.

1. Falsification: Inappropriate actions that falsify non-existent data or research results.

2. Fabrication: Intentionally manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, etc., or distorting or omitting data to distort the content or results of research.

3. Plagiarism: Improperly using another person's ideas, research content, or results without proper approval or citation.

4. Improper authorship: Improperly listing or granting authorship to individuals who did not contribute or grant authorship to individuals for reasons such as gratitude or respect without valid reasons.

5. Duplicate publication and simultaneous submission: Inappropriate re-use of one's own previous work in subsequent work, including self-plagiarism and publishing or submitting substantially similar work to two or more journals simultaneously.

6. Other serious acts that go beyond the generally accepted practices in the academic fields of English, English literature, linguistics, and English education.

7. To prevent the occurrence of research misconduct, one should avoid ignoring conflict of interest in accordance with the principle of interpretation, review, and publication.

* Conflict of interest: A variety of acts or behaviors that include individuals using their position to pursue personal or familial private interests or economic benefits.

Article 21 Handling and Proof of Research Misconduct

1. Procedure for Handling Research Misconduct

If research misconduct as specified in Article 20 is discovered, it shall be handled according to the following procedure:

a) Receipt of misconduct report

b) Immediate report to the President and notification to the Research Ethics Committee.

c) The Research Ethics Committee conducts its own investigation.

d) The verification process of misconduct proceeds through preliminary investigation, main investigation, and judgment stages.

2. Procedure for Proving Research Misconduct

a) Convocation of the Research Ethics Committee meeting

b) Acquisition of evidence for proof

c) Decision on misconduct and notification to the parties involved

d) Decision on disciplinary action and report to the Executive Committee

e) Announcement on the Association's website

f) Reporting misconduct handling and management achievements to the Korea

3. Research Foundation.

Measures for Research Misconduct

If misconduct is determined by the Research Ethics Committee, the following measures are taken:

a) Cancellation of publication for the determined paper, and for papers already published, announce the 'publication cancellation' of the relevant paper on the Association's website and delete it from the list of papers.

b) Authors of the paper are prohibited from submitting papers to the Association journal for a period determined by the Research Ethics Committee (minimum 3 years).

c) The informant of misconduct does not disclose personal information, does not permit exposure due to misconduct report, and does not receive disciplinary measures, undue pressure, or harm against the will of the person.

d) Allegations against the investigated party of misconduct are not disclosed to the public until the judgment result is confirmed, and ensure that the honor or rights of the investigated party are not unfairly violated during the verification process.

Article 22 Record Preservation and Follow-up Measures

1. Document Records:

All processes from receipt of the report to handling of misconduct shall be documented and preserved.

2. Website Announcement:

Results of misconduct shall be announced on the Association's website to inform other researchers of the importance of research ethics and actively prevent similar incidents.

3. Verification Report Preservation:

The report containing the results of the investigation on misconduct shall be maintained for at least 10 years.

4. Follow-up Measures:

If the result of the research is lost or the research content is distorted, the researcher's previous research and credibility shall be reported to the Research Ethics Committee, and the Committee shall guide the researcher on how to prevent further research misconduct.

Chapter 6 Publication Ethics

Article 23 Researcher's Publication Ethics

1. Researchers bear full responsibility for the content of their papers, the research process conducted, and the results achieved.

2. Researchers must adhere to the review and publishing regulations of the Journal of the Korean Association of English Language and Literature Education.

3. Researchers should submit original papers that have not been previously presented elsewhere and should not submit the same paper simultaneously to multiple journals.

4. Researchers must immediately notify the Association if errors are found in their submitted or published papers and discuss follow-up measures.

Article 24 Objectivity and Transparency of Papers

1. Researchers must disclose the research process thoroughly based on sufficient academic evidence as necessary.

2. In the humanities and social sciences, if statistical experiments or interviews are conducted, researchers must record the results faithfully, systematically store them, and preserve the basis of the papers. Additionally, when requested by reviewers or editors during the review process, researchers must provide relevant supporting documentation.

3. Researchers must transparently disclose any potential conflicts of interest of researchers that may influence the research results, the research process, or assistance received during the paper-writing process.

4. Researchers must disclose the funding details related to the research to help editors and readers understand the research results.

5. Researchers should not divide research results that can be published in a single paper into multiple papers for publication.

Article 25 Publication Ethics of Reviewers

1. Reviewers should accept reviews only when they can objectively and fairly review the papers with expertise. Otherwise, they must promptly return the papers and provide reasons for their decision.

2. Reviewers must adhere to review regulations and deadlines and submit their review reports accordingly.

3. Those who commission the review should not request reviews from individuals who can be identified as authors or who have conflicts of interest.

4. Reviewers must strictly maintain the anonymity of authors; if any information related to the author is included in the paper, it should result in rejection of the paper.

5. Reviewers must not use information obtained during the review process for personal gain.

6. If the reviewed author raises objections to the review results, reviewers must respond sincerely according to the prescribed procedures.

7. When reviewing papers, reviewers must determine the level of creativity of the paper's key words or phrases by searching through highly reliable databases established by associations or institutions affiliated with the association.

8. Reviewers should reject papers if they find that a substantial portion of the paper's main sentences or presented materials matches those in the database after entering the paper's main sentences or presented materials into a computer.

9. Reviews by reviewers affiliated with the same institution as the author are excluded from the review process.