Ethics Guideline

Ethics Regulations of the Korean Society of Food Culture

Established: November 08, 2007
Amended: April 04, 2008
February 01, 2014
April 27, 2015
July 08, 2016
April 01, 2022

Article 1 (Purpose)
These regulations aim to define the principles and standards regarding the roles and responsibilities of the members of the Korean Society of Food Culture (hereinafter referred to as the Society) required to enhance ethics, prevent research and publication misconduct, and secure research and publication ethics to maintain ethics and secure academic integrity in research and publication.

Article 2 (Applicability)
In principle, these regulations apply to the members of the Society and can be applied mutatis mutandis to persons who submit manuscripts to all the periodical publications of the Society, including the Journal of the Korean Society of Food Culture (hereinafter referred to as the JKSFC) and academic conference materials.

Chapter 1 Prevention of Misconducts in Research and Publication

Article 3 (Scope of Misconduct)
The misconduct provided in these regulations includes forgery, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, and inappropriate authorship of research articles, and papers with any misconduct prescribed below shall not be accepted for publication.
1. Forgery: The act of making up false data or research results that do not exist and recording or reporting them.
2. Falsification: The act of distorting research contents or results by artificially manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, etc., or by arbitrarily changing or deleting research raw data or results.
3. Plagiarism: The appropriation of another person’s ideas, research contents, research results, etc., without obtaining the author’s permission or giving appropriate credit.
4. Duplicate publication: Publishing an identical paper in multiple journals without providing appropriate references by publishing one’s work previously published elsewhere or a paper with a very similar content in a different journal without acknowledging the previous publication of the same data
5. Inappropriate authorship: Not granting authorship to individuals who have made substantial scientific or technological contributions to the research contents or results without justifiable reasons or assigning authorship to individuals who have not made any scientific or technological contributions for inappropriate reasons, such as the expression of appreciation, respect or courtesy
6. Acts of intentionally interfering with the investigation into one’s or another person’s alleged misconduct or acts of inflicting harm on the informant
7. Acts that seriously deviate from the range of normally acceptable acts in the science and technology communities

Article 4 (Definitions of Terms)    
1. “The informant” refers to a person who has recognized misconduct and informed the Society (or a committee) of the related evidence.
2. “The respondent” refers to a person who is the subject of the investigation of alleged research misconduct due to the report or recognition of the committee or a person who is the subject of an investigation since he or she is presumed to have engaged in research misconduct during the investigation process.
3. “The preliminary inquiry” refers to a preliminary procedure for determining whether the allegation warrants a formal investigation of the reported or recognized research misconduct.
4. “The formal investigation” refers to a procedure for investigating whether the alleged research misconduct has actually been committed or not.

Article 5 (Responsibilities and Duties of Peer Reviewers)
Reviewers should conduct the peer review of manuscripts fairly based on objective criteria as guided by the principle of academic integrity. The responsibilities and duties of reviewers are as follows.

1. Reviewers should determine whether to recommend the acceptance or rejection of the submitted manuscript for publication, should respect the character and intellectual independence of the author, and should not discriminate against the author on the grounds of sex, age, affiliation, educational background, religion, and national origin.
2. Reviewers should provide valid reasons for rejecting a manuscript, fairly evaluate manuscripts according to objective criteria regardless of personal interests, and be specific in their feedback, including criticisms, when writing a review report.
3. Reviewers have an obligation to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript. They should not exploit or reveal any information, assertions, interpretations, etc. in the manuscript in the peer review process without the author’s consent.
4. If reviewers detect any misconduct or inappropriate act in the peer review process, they should report it to the Ethics Committee.

Article 6 (Composition and Function of the Ethics Committee)
As provided for in these regulations, the Society constitutes the Ethics Committee, and the meetings and resolutions of the Ethics Committee shall be proceeded with as follows:

1. Composition: The Ethics Committee is comprised of five or more members of the Society. The president of the Society chairs this committee. The president appoints the members of the Ethics Committee on the nomination of the standing board. The term of office of the committee members is two years, and they may be reappointed.
2. Meetings: The Ethics Committee is established with the attendance of more than half of the registered members, and a resolution is passed with the consent of more than half of the members present. The chairperson has the right to vote, and the motion shall be deemed lost in the case of a tied vote.
3. Function: The committee deliberates and decides on the matters specified in the paragraphs below.
1) Matters concerning the receipt and handling of the reports of misconduct
2) Matters concerning the initiation of the formal investigation and the decision, approval, and redeliberation of the results of the investigation
3) Matters concerning the protection of the informant and respondent
4) Matters concerning the handling of the results of veracity verification regarding the alleged misconduct and follow-up measures.
5) Other matters concerning the operation of the committee

Article 7 (Procedure for Reporting Research Misconduct)
The informant may report misconduct in writing, by email, or by other methods, but they must submit the related evidence in writing and must report the misconduct in their real name in principle.

Article 8 (Protection of the Informant and Respondent)
The ethics committee should take the following measures to protect the rights and reputations of the informant and the respondent.

1. The Ethics Committee has an obligation to protect the informant and respondent from having disadvantages, undue pressure, or any harm due to the report or investigation of the alleged misconduct and should take measures to protect them.
2. The informant may request to be informed of the procedure and schedule of the investigation initiated after a report of misconduct, and the Ethics Committee should faithfully respond to the request.
3. The Ethics Committee should equally guarantee the rights and opportunities of the informant and the respondent to state opinions, raise objections, and defend themselves, and inform them of the related procedures in advance.
4. Until the Society makes the final decision on the violation of the Ethics Regulations, the ethics committee should not reveal the identity of the person concerned to protect his or her reputation and rights.

Article 9 (Preliminary Inquiry)

1.The preliminary inquiry refers to the procedure for determining whether it is necessary to investigate the alleged misconduct, and it should be started within 30 days from the date of receipt of a report of misconduct. The investigation committee is composed of up to three editorial board members, including the editor-in-chief.
2. As a result of the preliminary inquiry, if the respondent admits to all misconduct allegations, a decision may be made without going through a formal investigation.
3. If a decision not to conduct the formal investigation is made as a result of the preliminary inquiry, the informant should be informed in writing of the detailed reason for this decision within 14 days from the date of the decision.
4. If the informant is dissatisfied with the results of the preliminary inquiry, he or she may raise an objection by submitting it to the president of the Society within 30 days from the date of receipt of notification of the results.

Article 10 (Formal Investigation)

1. The formal investigation refers to the procedure to prove whether the alleged misconduct has actually occurred or not, and it should be conducted by constituting the Ethics Committee as provided for in Article 6.
2. In accordance with Paragraph 3 of Article 8, the Ethics Committee should provide the informant and the respondent with an opportunity to state their opinions, raise an objection, and defend their case before finalizing the results of the formal investigation. If the persons concerned do not respond, they shall be deemed to have no objection.

Article 11 (Judgment)
The judgment refers to the procedure of confirming the results of the formal investigation and notifying the informant and the respondent of the results in writing.

1. Members who have been determined to have violated Ethics Regulations will be subject to disciplinary actions, such as a warning, restriction on manuscript submission, suspension of membership for a specific period, and deprivation of membership. These disciplinary actions may be notified to the person’s affiliation or may be published in the journal.
2. The president of the Society should notify the informant and the respondent of the final decision of the standing board of directors in writing. If the informant or the respondent is dissatisfied with the decision, they may raise an objection within 30 days from the date of notification, and the ethics committee may review the objection and conduct a reinvestigation if necessary.

Article 12 (Investigation Report)
When the Ethics Committee conducts a preliminary inquiry and a formal investigation, it should submit the investigation report to the standing board of directors within 30 days after completion of each procedure. The report should include each of the following items.

1. The content of the report of misconduct
2. Investigation results
3. The list of the members of the investigation committee (only in the case of the formal investigation)
4. Whether the formal investigation was conducted or not and the reasons for the decision to initiate the formal investigation (only in the case of the preliminary inquiry)
5. The role of the respondent in the research in question and whether research misconduct has actually been committed or not (only in the case of the formal investigation)
6. The lists of related evidence, the names of witnesses and persons who participated in consultation (only in the case of the formal investigation)
7. Statements of the informant and respondent
8. Results of the request for the disposition of misconduct according to the results of veracity verification of the alleged misconduct (only in the case of the formal investigation)

Article 13 (Follow-up Actions Based on Investigation Results)
The board of directors should take the following actions after reviewing the content and results of the investigation in the investigation report as provided for in Paragraph 2 of Article 11.

1. The president of the Society convenes the board of directors within two months of receipt of the investigation report to review the investigation report of the Ethics Committee and make the final decision regarding the disposition of the alleged misconduct based on the investigation results.
2. If the investigation process or the content of the investigation report is deemed to have a problem in terms of rationality and validity, the standing board of directors may require the Ethics Committee to supplement the report.
3. The investigation processes of the committee should be recorded in the form of audio or video files, or written documents, and the records should be kept for at least five years.
4. The research results of members against whom disciplinary action has been taken will be deleted from the JKSFC, academic conference materials, and the Internet homepage of the Society.

Chapter 2. Bioethics

Article 14 (Human Subjects Research)
Human subjects research refers to research conducted on humans through a physical intervention or interaction with individuals, such as communication and interpersonal contacts, including clinical trials, sensory evaluations and survey research, or research using information, which allows the identification of individuals. In addition, a human subjects research project means a research project specified by the Bioethics and Safety Act. Researchers should conduct human subjects research in compliance with the following principles.

1. In accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, human subjects research should be conducted in a way that does not violate human dignity and values, and the human rights and welfare of human participants and their legal guardians should be given the highest priority in conducting research.
2. In principle, researchers should provide the study participants or their legal guardians with full explanations of the purpose of the study and the risks of psychological or physical harm that may arise as a result of participation in the research. They should state clearly in the manuscript that voluntary consent to participate has been obtained from participants or their guardians.
3. The privacy of human subjects and their guardians should be protected, and personal information with the potential for privacy infringement should be protected as confidential information except for cases where the written consent from the person concerned is obtained, or the use of the information is permitted by the relevant laws and regulations.
4. A person who intends to conduct research on human subjects should submit a research plan and obtain approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the institution that the researcher belongs before commencing research. If necessary, the editor may require the researcher to submit the written informed consent form and the written approval from the IRB.
5. Regarding other matters not prescribed herein, researchers should comply with the Bioethics and Safety Act.

Article 15 (Animal Testing)
Animal testing refers to experiments performed on laboratory animals for scientific purposes, such as education, testing, research, and manufacturing of biological products, or scientific procedures of such animal research. Animal testing should be carried out in compliance with the following principles.

1. Animal testing should be conducted in consideration of the dignity of the life of animals and the promotion of human welfare.
2. Animal testing should be conducted by individuals with sufficient knowledge and experience in the ethical treatment and scientific use of laboratory animals in research, and the minimum number of animals required for statistically significant results should be used.
3. When an experiment involving the pain of laboratory animals is performed, animals with low sensory abilities should be used. Appropriate measures should be taken to reduce pain and distress in laboratory animals using veterinary techniques, such as analgesia or anesthesia.
4. A person who plans to conduct animal testing should obtain the approval of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) of the institution that the researcher belongs before conducting animal research.
5. In principle, it should be stated that the experimental processes do not violate the regulations of the Ethics Committee of the research institution or the NIH Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.
6. Regarding other matters specified herein, animal testing should be conducted in compliance with relevant laws and regulations, such as the Laboratory Animal Act and the Animal Protection Act.

Chapter 3. Research and Publication Ethics

Article 16 (Criteria for authorship)
The JKSFC adheres to the criteria for authorship recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The authors should meet the following four criteria. Contributors who meet fewer than all four of the criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors but should be acknowledged.

1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Article 17 (Confidentiality)

1. Manuscripts submitted to journals are privileged communications that are authors’ private, confidential property, and authors may be harmed by premature disclosure of any or all of a manuscript’s details.
2. Editors, therefore, must not share information about manuscripts, including whether they have been received and are under review, their content and status in the review process, criticism by reviewers, and their ultimate fate, to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. Requests from third parties to use manuscripts and reviews for legal proceedings should be politely refused, and editors should do their best not to provide such confidential material should it be subpoenaed
3. Editors must also make clear that reviewers should keep manuscripts, associated material, and the information they contain strictly confidential. Reviewers and editorial staff members must not publicly discuss the authors’ work, and reviewers must not appropriate authors’ ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers must not retain the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy paper copies of manuscripts and delete electronic copies after submitting their reviews.
4. When a manuscript is rejected, it is best practice for journals to delete copies of it from their editorial systems unless retention is required by local regulations. Journals that retain copies of rejected manuscripts should disclose this practice in their Information for Authors.
5. When a manuscript is published, journals should keep copies of the original submission, reviews, revisions, and correspondence for at least three years and possibly in perpetuity, depending on local regulations, to help answer future questions about the work should they arise.
6. Editors should not publish or publicize peer reviewers’ comments without the permission of the reviewer and author. If journal policy is to blind authors to reviewer identity and comments are not signed, that identity must not be revealed to the author or anyone else without the reviewers’ expressed written permission.
7. Confidentiality may have to be breached if dishonesty or fraud is alleged. However, editors should notify authors or reviewers if they intend to do so, and confidentiality must otherwise be honored.

Article 18 (Conflicts of Interest)
Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should be asked at the time they are asked to critique a manuscript if they have relationships or activities that could complicate their review. Reviewers must disclose to editors any relationships or activities that could bias their opinions of the manuscript, and should recuse themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if the potential for bias exists. Reviewers must not use knowledge of the work they are reviewing before its publication to further their own interests.

Article 19 (The Editorial Board Members (Editorial Board) and Reviewers)

1. The editorial board members (the editorial board) should respect the character of the authors of submitted manuscripts and should not discriminate against individual authors on the grounds of any conditions irrelevant to writing papers, including gender, age, affiliation, race, religion, educational background, and national origin.
2. The editorial board members and the editorial board should not disclose the confidential information obtained during the editing process of the JKSFC and should not use the information to further any private interest.
3. The editorial board members and the editorial board should select papers to be published based on thoroughly academic grounds and determine the acceptance of manuscripts based on objectivity, academic integrity, and fairness.
4. The editorial board members and the editorial board should declare financial or other conflicts of interest that may affect the editorial decisions of the JKSFC and should not be involved in any part of all the publication processes of papers with a conflict of interest.
5. Reviewers should not personally exploit the information acquired during the review process and should discard the materials or data related to the manuscript after rejecting or completing the peer review.
6. Reviewers should adhere to the predetermined peer review schedule, faithfully perform the peer review, and provide detailed feedback when writing a review report. In addition, if a reviewer feels that he or she cannot perform the peer review in a timely manner, judges that his or her professional expertise is not suited for the review of the content of the manuscript, or has any conflict of interest that may affect the review, he or she shall immediately inform the editorial board of the fact and decline the review offer.
7. When a reviewer recognizes an act that violates research ethics in the process of the peer review, he or she should immediately inform the editorial board of the violation.
8. Reviewers should comply with the regulations of the Society regarding the review of manuscripts submitted to the JKSFC, including the Editorial Policies, Submission Guidelines, Guidelines for Peer Review, and Ethics Regulations of the JKSFC, and relevant laws and regulations, such as the Bioethics and Safety Act.

Chapter 4. Code of Ethics for Scientists and Engineers

Article 20 (Code of Ethics for Scientists and Engineers)
The members of the Society and individuals involved in the research activities of the Society shall comply with the Code of Ethics for Scientists and Engineers jointly enacted and promulgated on April 20, 2007, by the Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies, the Korean Academy of Science and Technology, the National Academy of Engineering of Korea, and the Korean National Commission for UNESCO.

1. Social Responsibility of Scientists and Engineers
Because science and technology have a great impact on society, scientists and engineers should conduct responsible research and intellectual activities as professionals. They should also recognize their responsibility to ensure that knowledge and technologies resulting from their research and scientific activities will contribute to the enhancement of the quality of life and welfare of human beings and the preservation of the environment.
2. Basic research ethics of scientists and engineers
Recognizing that honesty, integrity, and accuracy in research activities are essential for securing the reliability of research results, scientists and engineers should perform all research activities, such as proposal, planning, execution, and reporting of results in pursuit of these basic principles. In particular, they should reject fraudulent acts, such as fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and duplicate publication.
3. Principle of Universality
Scientists and engineers cannot be discriminated against based on race, sex, religion, or educational background and have equal rights and duties.
4. Maintaining dignity as a professional worker
Scientists and engineers should maintain pride and dignity as professionals who contribute to the promotion of human welfare by creating new knowledge and developing technologies.
5. Compliance with laws and regulations
Scientists and engineers should faithfully comply with the regulations set by the relevant laws and regulations, the norms set out in the Code of Ethics, and internationally accepted principles throughout the entire process of research and intellectual activities.
6. Respect for research subjects
If the subjects of scientific research are human, scientists and engineers should conform to bioethics by respecting human rights, and in animal research, they should pay attention to the dignity of life. When dealing with the natural environment, they should be aware of the importance of conservation of biodiversity and environmental protection to contribute to the promotion of human welfare.
7. Recording and preservation of research data
Scientists and engineers should faithfully record data, samples, etc., used or generated in the research process from the initial stage to the final stage, and preserve them for a specified period.
8. Authorship and Intellectual Property Rights
Authorship should be limited to those who participate directly in the research, such as presenting, designing, conducting, and interpreting the research idea. Scientists and engineers should respect the rights and intellectual property rights of the original authors by properly acknowledging the sources of others’ research achievements consulted or cited in the research process. The indicated authors are jointly responsible for the paper.
9. Rights and Responsibilities to Society
Scientists and engineers have the right to take advantage of the publicity of new discoveries, research, and intellectual activities and have a duty to respond faithfully to the demands of society.
10. Coping with Conflicts of Interest
Scientists and engineers should announce in advance any conflicts of interest that have arisen or are likely to arise in the course of research and intellectual activities, and give priority to the public interest over their own.
11. Creation of the Research Environment
Scientists and engineers should actively participate in creating an environment of intellectual freedom, fairness, openness, and mutual respect so that they can conduct responsible research and intellectual activities.
12. Implementation of Ethics Education
The person in charge of research and intellectual activities is responsible for educating participants so that they can faithfully practice the norms of this Code of Ethics.

Article 21 (Other Matters)
Matters not specified in these regulations are dealt with according to relevant laws and regulations and social norms.

1. (Enforcement Date) These Regulations take effect from April 1, 2022.