Article 1 (Purpose)
This regulation is aimed at the systemization of the system of research ethics by regulating the various matters in relation to the journal published from 「J-INSTITUTE」
Article 2 (Ethics of the researcher)
- The writer must take responsibility on the research misconduct from Article 4 on the submission about the Article from 「J-INSTITUTE」
- The writer must submit only from the actual contributed research.
- The writer must reflect in the order according to the level of contribution at actual research.
- The writer must take equal responsibility on the quality of the Article submitted and published.
Article 3 (Ethics of the reviewer)
- The reviewer must take responsibility of the quality of the Article evaluated.
- The reviewer must evaluate according to the review regulation and objectively evaluate the Article.
- The reviewer must be a specialist in the field of Article evaluation.
- The reviewer must keep security about the content of the Article and personal information about the writer until the decision of evaluation.
- The reviewer must evaluate within the evaluation period and send the results to the editorial board and if it is not possible to be evaluated, the reviewer must express the intentions.
- The reviewer must specify the grounds of the evaluation sheet of the Article submitted and the evaluation should be understood in a objective point of view.
Article 4 (Infraction)
Infraction proposes and conducts, and indicates the behaviors of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, forgery, falsification, false indication of authors, etc. intentionally or negligently on the research during presenting the Article and the definitions of the terms are as follows.
- ‘Plagiarism’ is the conduct of plagiarizing others’ ideas, research progresses, and/or results without proper approval.
- ‘Self-Plagiarism’ is the conduct of stating the ideas, process of research and results without marking the specifics of the origin that has already been stated from his own journal or book and stating it again in one’s journal.
- ‘Forgery‘ is the conduct of fabricating non-existing data or research outcome and recording or reporting them as true and existing.
- ‘Falsification’ is the conduct of counterfeiting research materials, tools, and/or research processes or the conduct of altering or omitting research data and outcome so the research record becomes not consistent with the truth.
- ‘False indication of authors’ is the practice of not assigning without any reason, the qualification of the writer of the Article who academically contributed to the content of research or results, or assigning the qualification who has not academically contributed for other reasons.
Article 5 (Focus)
This regulation applies to the researchers related to 「J-INSTITUTE」
Chapter 2 「Research Ethics Committee」 Activities
Article 6 (Structure)
- Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as “committee”) within 「J-INSTITUTE」to deliberate data related to research ethics shall be placed.
- The chairman will be the manager of「J-INSTITUTE」.
- The committee will be composed of persons within 15 including chief editor, general affairs manager, chairman of research, chairman of information, operation director, chairman of planning committee, and the chairman of the international committee.
- To manage following business, 1 assistant can be chosen, and the assistant will be elected from the committee.
Article 7 (Functions)
The committee will deliberate the following issues.
- Issues related to expansion of research ethics
- Issues related to establishing honesty of research results
- Issues related to prevention of research misconduct
- Issues related to education of the research ethics regulations
- Issues related to investigation and penalty on violation on the regulations of research ethics
- Issues related to the research ethics referred by the chairman of the committee
Article 8 (Opening of conference)
- The chairman must call a meeting in the case of a violation of research ethics or if there is a report related to this.
- The conference is held with attendance of more than half of registered members and is decided on the vote of the agreement on more than half of the attended members.
- For deliberating and voting, if needed, the person concerned can attend and the committee can listen to the person’s opinion.
- The committee meeting shall be undisclosed in principle.
- The committee must open a conference annually.
Article 9 (Approval)
The approval of the committee must be held in attendance of the majority of members and resolved by over two-thirds of agreements of the attendees.
Article 10 (Authority and duty)
- The committee can request attendance and submission of resources about the informant, examinee, witness, and testifier during the process of investigation.
- If the examinee refuses to attend or submit the resources requested without any proper reason, they can be presumed to admit the fact of suspicion.
- The committee can take substantial action on prevention of the loss, damage, concealment, or falsification on research records or evidence.
- Members of the committee must keep the secrets on all the matters related to deliberation.
Article 11 (Receiving reports)
- Reports related to violation of research ethics of 「J-INSTITUTE」must be reported through calling the executive office with one’s real name, document, or email etc.
- The committee must investigate on whether or not there was violation in the case of substantial suspicion.
Article 12 (Attendance and resource submission)
- The committee can request attendance for testimony on informant, examinee, witness, and testifier and the examinee must accept.
Article 13 (Protection of rights and confidentiality of the informant and examinee)
- Exposing the identity of the informant directly or indirectly is not allowed and until the verification of whether or not the violation was taken place, caution is required for the honor or rights of the examinee not to be invaded.
- All issues of investigation must be kept confidential and the person who participates in the investigation must not announce any information acquired from the process of performance of duty. But, if there is a necessity of being made public, it is possible through the process of the decision of the committee.
Chapter 3 Actions of 「Research Ethics Committee」
Article 14 (Handling of violations of research)
- In the case of reports or recognitions of violations, the committee must deal with the suspicion with adequate investigation.
- The person who has direct interest with the examinee cannot be involved in the deliberation, decision, or investigation.
- The investigation results of the violation of research must be reported to 「J-INSTITUTE」, and the record should be kept for 5 years starting from the date of the end of the process.
Article 15 (Objections and the guarantee of opportunity to refute the allegations)
The committee must offer to the examinee who was reported violating the research ethics a chance to make objections and sufficient opportunities to try to clear the allegation(s).
Article 16 (Measures)
- If the case of violation of research has been affirmed or judged, the following measures must be taken.
- Sending a reprimand letter and investigation results
- Disapproval of publication on the Article that was written in violation of research
- Delete the Article that was already published from the list
- Notify the cancellation of publication through the web site
- Notify the members of「J-INSTITUTE」
- Disqualify or suspend member qualification
- Suspension from submission and qualification of judging for 3 years
- Numbers 1 and 4 must include the name of author, name of Article, gathering of Article, date of cancellation and reason of cancellation.
- The committee can disqualify or suspend a person who has intentionally or unintentionally reported something that is different from the truth or spread false information related to research ethics from being a member.
Article 17 (Reinvestigation)
Should the examinee or the informant wish to appeal against the judgment made, he/she may request re-investigation within 14 days of notice by submitting a statement indicating the reason for an appeal.
Article 18 (Rehabilitation and follow-ups)
If, through investigation, the violation of research is ruled not guilty, the committee must make effort for the rehabilitation of the examinee and take adequate follow-up measures.
Article 19 (Storage of records and Disclosure)
- The relevant records of the investigation in the research misconduct shall be kept for five years after the termination of the investigation.
- The results after the judgment must be notified to members and information related to the list and identity of the participants of the counsel; the informant, investigator, witness, and testifier, can be excluded from being publicly disclosed through the decision of the committee in case there is a possibility of any disadvantages with the person directly involved.