This guideline is applied to the members of this society and persons involved in the publication of the journal of this society, the Journal of Korean Medical Society of Acupotomology (hereafter called the journal) (author, examiner, and editor).

All papers submitted and published through this society must follow by this guideline except when there is other related guideline.

All authors submitting paper to this society must submit a ‘pledge of compliance for research ethics’ with signature upon applying for publication of paper. There is separate form to follow by.

The author should be involved in the planning and designing, data collection, digitization of data, and writing of the paper, where any persons who contributed to major modifications in writing the paper can also be authors unless violating the copyright law. The first author is who directs the study by maximally producing core data of the paper for digitization to write the first draft of the paper. The corresponding author is who approved the final version of the paper, holding overall responsibility of the paper, with duty of corresponding with the readers. The co-authors are the authors other than the first author and the corresponding author in the paper. However, those who only provided data or research fund, or only instructed simple technique in the study group cannot become an author.

Since the author holds responsibility of the study, the author should not be discriminated upon qualification, and the order of authors should be determined fairly upon the degree of contribution to the study, irrelevant to the relative position.

The author should follow by the regulations related to the study, and especially respect intellectual property right like patent or copyright.

The author should perform all the research and academic activities with veracity and accuracy. There should be no research cheating like forgery, falsification, or plagiarism.

The author should be recognized only by research performed or contributed by him or herself and should take responsibility of the content.

Upon finding a serious error in one’s paper after submission, the author should correct the error without hesitation with adequate means.

The author should be fully aware of the management guideline for research notes, and sincerely record research process and results in the experiment or research note and preserve for three years after publication in the journal.

The examiner should respect the author’s personality as an intellectual and paper submitted as the author’s intellectual product should also be examined in accordance with this respect.

The examiners must adhere to the regulations set by the editorial committee.

The examiner should fairly evaluate the requested paper upon scholastic conscience and objective standards excluding any personal scholastic belief or personal acquaintance with the other. If it is not adequate or it is difficult to examine, it must be notified to the editorial committee without hesitance.

The examiner must notify the editorial committee when the requested paper is published or under review in another journal.

The examiners should not open to public or use in private any information of the author or the contents of the paper. Also, it should be cautious that the contents of the examined paper are not cited in other research before publication in the journal.

Editors hold all the rights and responsibility for acceptance or rejection of publication of the submitted paper.

Editors should adhere to the regulations related to editing set in the ' Instructions for editing or review of published papers in Journal of Korean Medical Society of Acupotomology ', and make sure there are no dispute over fairness raised for editing among members.

Information of the author or the contents of the paper gained through editing must not be open to the public.

Upon processing the tasks given to the editorial committee, the associate editor should identify to the final any raised research ethics problem of the paper, postpone publication of the study till it becomes clear, and submit the ethical violation in document to the research ethics committee.

This regulation stipulates the matters related to composition and management of the research ethics committee (hereafter called “committee”).

The committee is authorized to below matters.

• 1. Enactment and amendment of code of research ethics
• 2. Consideration and decision of matters related to violation of research ethics and disciplinary action
• 3. Consideration of matters related to research ethics within the society

The committee is organized as below.

• 1. The committee is organized of five members including the chairman.
• 2. The chairman is appointed by the president of the society. However, director of academic affairs and director of editing become the official members.
• 3. Members are recommended by the chairman and appointed by the president of the society.
• 4. The tenure of the member of the research ethics committee is three years and can be reappointed. Other matters follow the articles of the society.
• 5. The director of editing is the secretary of the committee.

The obligations of the committee are as follows.

• 1. The committee must observe secrecy of discussed matters (including the identity of the informer, examinee, examiner, testifier, and persons related to consultation).
• 2. The committee must complete the consideration on violation of ethics before the publication of the following issue of journal.
• 3. The committee must keep the contents of the meeting in minutes and report the result of consideration to the board of directors.

• 1. Board of directors is convened by the chairman or by request of more than 1/3 of the registered members.
• 2. The resolutions of the committee is passed with consent over the majority of the registered members. However, the consent or dissent of the member absent on resolution for some reason may be identified by the chairman via separate process.
• 3. Resolutions of the committee take effect after the resolution of the board of directors.

For consideration of the research ethics, consultation to the related department within the society is available. In addition, when special knowledge is needed for consideration, an outside expert may be appointed as the consideration member.

Member of this society, person related to publication of this journal and public researcher may report to the research ethics committee upon member of this society or person related to the publication of this journal obviously violating the research ethics regulations. In this case, the report should be by one’s real name in principle, and research cheating report form should be turned in to the research ethics committee.

Any person related to research ethics issues should not open to public the identity of the informant and the examinee. However, when the reported content turns out false, then the informant is no more an object of secret protection.

The society must notify the informant and the examinee upon the issues related to the research ethics violation.

Any member or person related to the publication of this journal reported with violation of research ethics regulations must comply to the investigation process by the research ethics committee.

The research ethics committee can autonomously determine the process and method of verification within the contents of ‘Guidelines for ensuring research ethics’

The informant who reported on the violation of research ethics regulation and the reported examinee equally have the opportunities for statement of opinion, objections, and defense.

When the informant or the examinee is doubtful of a specific member of the research ethics committee’s fairness for consideration and resolutions, he or she may apply for challenge for the specific ethics member with stating the reason. However, the validity of the application for challenge follows the consideration of the research ethics committee.

Upon objection to the decisions of the research ethics committee, the informant or the examinee may apply for resurvey within fourteen days of the date of notification.

Upon identification of no violation of research ethics regulations, the committee must take measures for restoring honor of the examinee.

The disciplinary action of the research ethics committee enters into action via the resolution and official announcement of the board of directors.

The following actions violate the research ethics regulations.

• 1. Substitution
  It is where the author’s research activities are not actual, and the writing of the paper or data collection and information processing is substituted by another person.
• 2. Plagiarism
  It is violation of another person’s intellectual property rights via direct use of another person’s opinion, idea, study results, etc. in one’s paper or book without fair approval or indication of source. However, citation is not needed when the study results are opened as general knowledge in documents or books of public organizations.
• 3. Fabrication
  It is falsely making up of non-existent research data or results.
• 4. Falsification
  It is distortion of the study contents or results by artificial operation or deletion of the study materials, apparatus, process, etc.
• 5. Self-plagiarism
  It is separate presentation of one paper into more than or equal to two contents, or making another paper with equal or similar results via adding other data to the previously published paper.
• 6. Duplicate submission and duplicate publication
  It is submission as a new paper or publication as a new book of one’s previously published study results (including the paper that is publication expected or under review) with composition in same language or another language without objective distinction, regardless of countries. However, when the reader class is different or if it is a working paper of summary from conference or seminar, it is recognized as secondary publication and it is not violation of ethics regulation.
• 7. Unfair marking of authors It is either giving qualification to persons with no academic contribution, or not giving qualification for authors to persons with academic contribution to the paper or book without fair reason.
• 8. Improper citation and indication of reference
  Citation of a sentence with more than or equal to six consecutive words should be specified in the footnote. (However, experimental method is an exception.) Reference in another person’s study should not be deceived as if searched by oneself for reference.
• 9. Damage to the study note
  It is deliberate damage to the study note or alteration or deletion of data within the note.
• 10. Obstruction of business
  It is not cooperating to the investigation of research ethics violation, giving harm to the informant, or disseminating false truth or information different from the truth either by deliberation or grievous fault.
• 11. Improper execution of research fund
  It is being pointed out on improper execution of research fund by the aiding institutions.

The following disciplinary actions are enforced upon the degree of violation of research ethics.

• 1. Warning for adherence to ethics
• 2. Rejection to publication of paper (in case identified beforehand)
• 3. Deletion of according paper from the journal of this society
• 4. Prohibition of submission of papers from one to three years for all authors
• 5. Notification of ethics violation to the author’s affiliated organizations and National Research Foundation of Korea
• 6. Suspension of qualification as a member

Establishment and amendment of regulations must be approved by the board of directors, and it is effective immediately upon the approval.

All matters not specified in the regulation follow the custom and consideration and resolutions of the research ethics committee.