모바일 메뉴 닫기

 

Chapter 1. General Provisions 

 

Article 1. (Purpose) Asian Development Perspectives (ADP) Code of Ethics is to maintain the authenticity and research ethics of papers that are submitted to ADP published by the Institute for Poverty Alleviation and International Development (IPAID) at Yonsei University. 

 

Article 2. (Application) This rule applies to all members who are directly and indirectly involved in the publication of ADP. 

 

Article 3. (The Range of Application) Any case that is related to the establishment of research ethics and verification of authenticity should follow these rules. 

 

Article 4. (The Scope of Unethical Conduct) 

 

① Research cheating (shortened to ‘cheating’) includes fabrication, falsification of   facts and data, plagiarism, 

    and wrongful expression as article authors. Definitions of unethical conduct include: 

    1. Fabrication: To create false research results or data that does not exist. 

    2. Falsification: To distort the results or contents of a research by randomly modifying and deleting data or

       artificially manipulating the research material,   equipment, or process. 

    3. Plagiarism: To steal others’ idea, research contents, or results without proper  approval or quotation. 

    4. Wrongful expression as article authors: Not giving authorship acknowledgement to a person who reasonably
      contributed 
to the article or qualifying persons as authors who did not reasonably contribute to the article. 

    5. Intentionally interrupting the investigation of unethical conduct of oneself or others or harming an informant. 

    6. Acts that are seriously outside the range of what is generally accepted in the academic field. 

    7. Acts such as bribing, forcing, or threatening others to engage in unethical conduct. 

 

② An “Informant” is defined as someone who reported the unethical conduct. 

 

③ An “Examinee” is defined as someone found to be engaged in unethical conduct or presumed to be involved
    in dishonest acts.
 Testifiers and witnesses are excluded. 

 

④ A “Preliminary Investigation” is the procedure that is taken to decide whether charges of unethical conduct warrant

    further investigation. 

 

⑤ An “Example Investigation” is the procedure that is taken to ascertain the charge of unethical conduct. 

 

⑥ “Judgment” is the procedure that is taken to decide whether the examinee of the manuscript in question was involved
     in 
unethical conduct and to decide sanctions to be taken by the ADP editorial board. 

 

 

 

Chapter 2. Verification of Authenticity and Research Ethics 

 

Article 5. (Procedure) Any case about the verification of authenticity and research ethics of ADP follows in the order of a preliminary investigation, an example investigation, and judgment. 

 

Article 6. (Preliminary Investigation) 

① The preliminary investigation related to the verification of authenticity and research ethics is conducted by

    the steering committee. 

 

② The preliminary investigation should begin within 15 days after receiving notice and a final decision must be

    made within 30 days after the starting date. The head of the steering committee can extend the investigation

    if more time is needed to secure evidence. 

 

③ The results of the preliminary investigation should be noticed in written form to the informant and the examinee

    within 10 days after deliberation. 

 

Article 7. (Example Investigation and Judgment) 

① An example investigation related to the verification of authenticity and establishment of research ethics is conducted
   by 
the steering committee based on the deliberation results. A final decision will also be made by the steering
   committee.
 

 

② An example investigation should start within 30 days after the editing committee submits the results of a preliminary

   investigation for consideration to the steering committee and it must be done by 90 days after the start of the
   investigation. 

 

Article 8. (Function) 

 ① The editing committee submits to the steering committee and deliberates, 

  1. Any case that is related to the establishment and management of research ethics and systems
     related to authenticity. 

   2. A case that is connected to receipt and handling of information about cheating. 

   3. A case that submits the preliminary investigation and the results to the board meeting for consideration. 

   4. Any case that is related to the protection of the informer and the examinee. 

   5. Any other case that is about the establishment of research ethics and research authenticity. 

 

 ② The steering committee deliberates and makes final decisions about, 

   1. The establishment and management of a system that is related to research ethics and authenticity. 

   2. Unethical conduct. 

   3. Handling and follow-ups of verification results of research authenticity. 

   4. A case that is submitted by the editing committee about other cases of ethical misconduct. 

 

Article 9. (Meeting) 

① The editing committee and the steering committee is called upon byeach chairmen and they become the chairmen. 

 

② A meeting needs majority attendance to commence and a decision is made based on the agreement of

    two-thirds of attendees. 

 

③The editing committee and the steering committee meetings are private and they can listen to the persons
    concerned, 
if needed. 

 

Article 10. (Exclusion) Anyone concerned with the case being deliberated may participate in the meetings of the editing committee and the steering committee. 

 

Article 11. (Attendance and Material Submission) The editing committee and the steering committee may ask for attendance and material submission from the informer, the examinee, witnesses, and testifiers. The informer, the examinee, witnesses,
and testifiers must comply with the request.
 

 

 

 

Chapter 3. Reporting and Investigation of Unethical Conduct 

 

Article 12. (Report and Receipt of Unethical Conduct) The informer should report under his or her own name by giving oral statements, written statements, and evidence of phone calls or email conversations. All related evidences must be in 

written form. 

 

Article 13. (Protection of the Rights of the Informer) 

①The editing committee and the steering committee must protect the identity of the informer and all effort should be made to prevent the release of the informer’s identity. 

 

②The editing committee and the steering committee should take measures to prevent the harassment, discrimination or threatening of an informer because of the report. 

 

③ An informer who knowingly gives false information is excluded from the protection target. 

 

Article 14. (Protection of the Rights of the Examinee) The editing committee and the steering committee must honor the informer’s rights throughout the investigation and recover the honor of an examiner who is proven innocent. 

 

Article 15. (Promise of Secrecy) Everything related to the investigation including reporting, investigation, deliberation, making decisions, and measures must be kept secret and the persons involved in the investigation must not reveal any information about the investigation process. If there is a reasonable claim to release information to make it public, it must be approved by the committee chairman. 

 

Article 16. (Protection of the Rights of Raising Objections and Defense) The editing committee must guarantee equal rights of the informer and the examinee and must inform them of the investigation process in advance. 

 

 

 

Chapter 4. Handling and Reconsideration of Unethical Conduct 

 

Article 17. (Handling of Misconduct) If misconduct is verified, the following measures may be taken, 

 

① Prohibition of submission to ADP for two years. 

 

② Public announcement of cheating in the edition of ADP following the verification of unethical conduct. 

 

③ Elimination and invalidation of the manuscript in question. 

 

④ Notice of unethical conduct to the institution that is connected to the guilty party. 

 

Article 18. (Reconsideration) If the examinee or the informer has any objections to the decisions of the editing committee and the steering committee, reconsideration can be requested in written form within 30 days after the notification. 

 

Article 19. (Storage and Release of Records) Records related to the preliminary investigation and example investigation is stored by the editing committee for 5 years after the conclusion of investigation. 

 

Article 20. (Application) Any case that is not regulated by this regulation can be implemented with approval by the steering committee. 

*All manuscripts must be submitted via our online submission system.