Research Ethics Regulations (Eng)

Research Ethics Regulations


Enacted : 2007. 06. 01.

1st revision : 2008. 09. 01.

2nd revision : 2009. 07. 08.

3rd revision : 2022. 02. 23.

The Modern English Education Society (henceforth referred to as Society) promotes the development of English education in Korea through the linkage of English education theory with field education and aims at conducting research on English teaching methodologies, promoting the joint development of English education materials, and providing scholarships for prospective researchers and educators. In the process of achieving these goals, the Society takes into consideration the freedom of academic research and the creativity and morality of researchers and sees them as important values. Therefore, researchers who seek the truth must strictly follow these guidelines of research ethics in order to secure and maintain the integrity of their research.


Article 1 General Provisions

The purpose of these regulations is to stipulate the principles and standards of research ethics which researchers (including authors, reviewers, and the editorial committee) must abide by during the entire process of submitting, reviewing, and publishing a manuscript in the journal of the Society.


Article 2 Ethical Principles of Research

Section 1 Role and Responsibilities of Researchers

Researchers must conduct research autonomously based on the freedom of research and have the following roles and responsibilities.

1) Researchers must respect the personality of research subjects and treat them fairly.

2) Researchers must protect the personal information and privacy of their research subjects.

3) Researchers must conduct honest and transparent research based on the facts.

4) When returning professional knowledge to society, researchers must maintain an academic conscience as is required of an expert.

5) Researchers must contribute to furthering academic development by announcing new research results.

6) When using their own or others’ works, researchers must recognize and respect the achievements of previous researchers, such as acknowledging previous sources in an appropriate manner.

7) Researchers must maintain ethical responsibilities within the process of signing a research contract, receiving research funds, and executing their research agendas.

8) Researchers must not be affected by the interests of the research funding institution, and all interests related to the research must be specified in the research publication.

9) When publishing their research, researchers must accurately reveal their affiliations and positions (overall author information) in order to maintain the credibility of their research.

10) Researchers must continuously participate in the education of research ethics.

Section 2 Ethics for Joint Research

1) If a graduate student or post-doc researcher has contributed to the research process, the researcher must recognize such efforts.

2) If a researcher has conducted joint research with a related person (a minor under the age of 19 or a family member within the fourth degree, such as a spouse or child), they are obliged to clarify the research contributions through deliberation given by the research ethics committee.

3) If the ethics of joint research are violated, they must be dealt with according to the resolutions of the research ethics committee, and the related person must notify the relevant institution which has benefited from the research.

Section 3 Research Ethics for Human Subjects

1) Human subjects research or research involving human subjects must be deemed as socially and ethically acceptable research.

2) During the research process and during the processing of research results, researchers must be careful not to conduct research in an unethical manner. Therefore, they should inform the research participants of the following:

(a) The researcher should fully explain the research procedure to the research participants and, in the case of research that requires an experiment, fully explain the experimental procedures in detail.

(b) The researcher must explain in detail to the study participants any possibilities for discomforts or risks which may arise while participating in the study.

(c) The researcher must explain to the research participants the benefits that can be obtained by participating in the research.

(d) The researcher should provide opportunities for research participants to ask questions about the research procedures.

(e) The researcher must inform the research participants that they can withdraw their consent to participate in the study at any time and that they can stop participating in the study even in the middle of the study.

(f) The researcher must not distort the purpose, direction, and results of the research through compensation for research participation.

3) For human subjects research, it is recommended to submit an IRB (Institutional Review Board) approval letter from the affiliated institution.

Section 4 Obligations to Manage Conflicts of Interest

1) A conflict of interest means a case that may negatively affect fair judgment as a researcher or research performance due to one of the following reasons.

(a) Financial conflicts of interest: A situation caused by the researcher’s specific financial interest which may affect the research in some way

(b) Interpersonal conflicts of interest: A situation caused by the researcher’s personal relationships (acquaintances, conflicts, competitions, etc.) with individuals or affiliated institutions which may affect the research in some way

(c) Intellectual conflicts of interest: A situation caused by the researcher’s religious beliefs, worldviews, beliefs, or theoretical convictions which may affect the research in some way

(d) Conflicts of interest due to role conflicts: A situation caused by the researcher’s role as a member of the affiliated institution (education, volunteer work, outside activities, etc.) which may affect the research in some way

(e) Other conflicts of interest: A situation caused by other reasons equivalent to (a)-(d)

2) If there is a possibility that a conflict of interest may arise in relation to the research, the researcher has responsibility to secure transparency and accountability by disclosing all of these factors and do their best to have them not negatively affect the research.

3) When submitting a manuscript, the researcher must state all relevant information related to the research funding, sponsors, affiliated organizations, and possible conflicts of interest.

Section 5 Reflection of Gendered Innovations

The manuscript to be published in this journal must faithfully and strictly follow the guidelines recommended by Gendered Innovations (

1) In the case of a research paper that concerns humans, the researcher should explicitly distinguish between sex and gender and describe them correctly.

2) In the case of a research paper concerning humans, it is recommended to include men and women as the research subjects and then to present results according to the differences between the men and women, if necessary, according to the purposes and goals of the study.

3) The researcher should describe the method of determining race or ethnicity and the necessary information which was used for the classification.

Article 3 Types and Handling of Research Misconduct 

Section 1 Scope of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct refers to the fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and unfair identification of authors, in addition to other acts which impair the soundness and integrity of the research activities, such as proposing R&D projects, conducting R&D, reporting, and publishing research results, among other activities. The definitions of types and their terms are as follows.

1) Fabrication: An act of falsely creating, recording, or reporting non-existent, original research data, research data, or research results

2) Falsification: An act of distorting research contents or results through artificially manipulating research data, instruments, or processes or by arbitrarily modifying or deleting original research data or research data

3) Plagiarism: The act of using another individual’s original ideas or creations, aside from general knowledge, without proper acknowledgment of the source and thus leading a third party to recognize them as the author’s own creations

(a) An act of using all or a portion of the research contents of another individual as it is without the proper citation of the source

(b) An act of partially using the word or sentence structures of another individual’s work without the proper citation of the source

(c) An act of generally using the original ideas of other individuals without the citation of the source

(d) An act of translating and using another individual’s work without the citation of the source

4) Unethical authorship: An act of failing to grant correct authorship to a person who has contributed to the research contents or results without any justifiable reasons or of granting authorship to a person who has not in any way contributed to the research contents or results for reasons such as desiring to showcase gratitude or courtesy

(a) An act of granting authorship credits, even if there is no contribution to the research contents or results

(b) An act of failing to grant authorship, though there has been a contribution to the research contents or results

(c) An act of publishing a student’s thesis or dissertation in an academic journal under the sole name of the advisor

5) Obstruction of a research misconduct investigation: An act of intentionally obstructing the investigation of one’s own or other individuals’ research misconduct, including actions such as harming the informant

6) Other unethical acts which seriously deviate from the range that is generally accepted in the English education academia

Section 2 Regulations on Duplicate Submission and Duplicate Publication

1) Manuscripts submitted to or under review in other journals cannot be submitted to this journal, and manuscripts submitted to or under review in this journal also cannot be submitted to other journals.

2) Duplicate publication is not permitted in this journal. However, in the cases of (b)-(d), if the relevant facts are specified in the article, it will not be considered as a case of duplicate publication.

(a) Duplicate publication: An act of obtaining unreasonable benefits, such as the receiving of research funds or being recognized as a separate research achievement, in the case where the researcher publishes an article that is identical or substantially similar to their previous work without the proper and correct citation of the source

(b) If the contents which have already been published in an academic journal/book have been modified to be easily understood and accessible by the general public and have then been republished in a general liberal arts journal/book (i.e., secondary publication), it is not subject to classification as duplicate publication.

(c) If a short paper presented at a conference is published in a conference proceeding, or in any other format, and then published as a long paper, it is not subject to classification as duplicate publication.

(d) If a portion or the full version of a dissertation is published in an academic journal or as an academic book, it is not subject to classification as a duplicate publication.

3) Since the term “self-plagiarism” can raise serious socio-cultural and moral issues, the term “duplicate publication” is used instead.

Section 3 Handling and Verification of Research Misconduct

1) Procedure for dealing with research misconduct

If research misconduct, as specified in Section 1, is discovered, it will be dealt with according to the following procedures.

(a) An allegation of research misconduct must be received.

(b) The alleged case is immediately reported to the president and then notified to the research ethics committee.

(c) The research ethics committee conducts its own independent investigation.

(d) The verification procedure for research misconduct is carried out according to 2).

2) Research misconduct verification procedure

(a) Convene a meeting with the members of the research ethics committee

(b) Secure potential verification evidence from all possible sources

(c) Review the available evidence for research misconduct and notify the involved parties

(d) Discuss and determine whether the research misconduct is substantiated and supported by the evidence after providing the information to the respondent (the person against whom the allegation is directed) while giving an opportunity to answer the allegation and provide their own information and evidence in relation to it

(e) Make a disciplinary decision at the level of the senior board of directors and then report it to the executive board members

(f) Notify the decision by posting it on the website of the Society

(g) Submit a final investigation report of the research misconduct to the National Research Foundation of Korea

3) Measures against research misconduct

If the research ethics committee determines that it is an act of research misconduct, it will be dealt with as follows.

(a) The paper that had originally been decided to be published will be canceled and withdrawn, and in the case where the paper has already been published, the “cancellation of publication” of the paper will be announced on the website of the Society according to the resolutions of the research ethics committee, and the paper will be deleted from the list of published papers.

(b) The author is not permitted to submit a manuscript to this journal during the duration of the period that is determined by the senior board of directors (for a period of at least three years).

(c) The identity of the complainant (the person who makes an allegation of research misconduct) must be kept confidential, and the complainant shall not be subject to disciplinary action, undue pressure, harm, or their identity being disclosed against their own will.

(d) The confidentiality of the respondent must be maintained until a disciplinary decision is finalized, and the reputation or rights of the respondent under investigation shall not be unreasonably infringed upon during the research misconduct verification procedures.

Section 4 Follow-Up Measures

1) In the case of research misconduct, the entire process, from receiving an allegation of research misconduct to then handling, must be documented and kept.

2) The decision of research misconduct will be notified on the website of the Society in order to inform other researchers of the importance of research ethics and to prevent research misconduct.

3) The members of the Society will be notified of the research ethics regulations to activate their research ethics and morality as a researcher.

Article 4 Ethics in Peer Review

During the process of reviewing a submitted paper, the reviewer must strictly examine it to ensure that a proper evaluation takes place.

Section 1 Fairness of Review

1) Exclusion of stakeholders from the process of review

(a) The editorial committee shall not request a review from the reviewer who is able to identify the author of the paper or who is considered to have a personal interest or connection with the author of the paper.

(b) The reviewer must reject the review if the reviewer can identify the author of the paper by the contents or title of the paper or any other information.

(c) The reviewer must withdraw from the review if any information related to the author of the paper is included in the paper.

2) Notification of research misconduct

Reviewers must immediately notify the editorial committee when they discover that the reviewed paper is already in the process of being reviewed or has been published in another journal or when research misconduct is suspected.

Section 2 Objectivity of Review

Reviewers shall evaluate the papers based on all of the objective criteria regardless of their personal inclinations or interests.


Section 3 Verification of the Creativity of the Manuscript Under Review

When submitting a paper to this journal, the author must conduct a plagiarism check on the paper through the Korea Citation Index (KCI) and submit a report. When reviewing a paper, the reviewer must examine the report and reflect its contents within the evaluation.


Section 4 Confidentiality of the Manuscript Under Review

Reviewers shall not divulge or use any information related to the paper under review, such as the contents or the decision, for personal purposes and without justifiable reasons until the time at which the paper is published.


Article 5 Ethics in Publication

If it is determined that a portion of the data or the contents of the manuscript submitted to this journal may cause any legal or ethical problems, the publication shall not be permitted.

Section 1 Prohibition of Republishing

If the manuscript contains contents which have already been published elsewhere, its publication is prohibited due to copyright issues. 

Section 2 Prohibition of Publication of Anti-Social Data

If the manuscript contains any contents or materials which violate the general principles of society, such as unethical contents, its publication will be prohibited because it is considered to cause a conflict in society.

Section 3 CCL Setting

The author(s) are obliged to confirm and agree to the contents of the journal’s copyright laws, open access declaration, and free license conditions (Creative Commons License, CCL) as specified within the editorial board regulations.


Article 6 Operation of the Research Ethics Committee

Section 1 Composition of the Research Ethics Committee

1) The committee consists of one chairperson and no more than six members at any given time.

2) The chairperson is the research vice president of the Society.

3) The president appoints the committee members, as recommended by the chairperson. The committee members must be members of the Society.

4) The term of office of the chairperson and committee members is limited to two years.

Section 2 Duties of the Research Ethics Committee

1)The chairperson oversees the overall work of the committee.

2) The committee reviews the following matters on the ethical obligations of the members of the Society for academic research and then reports the results to the executive committee.

(a) Violations of research ethics regulations for papers submitted to the journal

(b) Complaints concerning research integrity submitted to the Society

(c) Research misconduct related to the Society

(d) All other matters related to research ethics as suggested by the president or the chairperson

Section 3 Convocation and Resolution of the Research Ethics Committee

1) When the agenda of the committee is received, the chairperson must convene a meeting and preside over the meeting.

2) The meeting is opened with the attendance of a majority of the committee members, and decisions can only be made with the consent of a majority of the committee members present.

Section 4 Research Ethics Committee’s Request for Review and Procedure

1) Members or interested parties of the Society may request that the committee determine whether or not the writing of a specific member violates the research ethics regulations of the Society through e-mail. In this case, the request for investigation must be made through the real name of the requester.

2) When a request for an investigation is received, the chairperson must report it to the president and convene a meeting of the committee as soon as possible.

3) The committee verifies the research misconduct according to the following procedures.

(a) The committee secures the potential verification evidence and thoroughly reviews it. If necessary, the committee will conduct interviews with the respondent, the complainant, and the reviewers of the paper in question in order to determine whether the research ethics regulations have been violated.

(b) The committee discusses and determines whether a research ethics violation has occurred after providing the respondent with the opportunity to explain themselves and the situation. Explanations can be made orally by attending a committee meeting or through e-mail.

4) Committee meetings will be held privately and must remain confidential until a final decision is made, and the identity of the respondent or the progress of the meeting shall not be disclosed to any outside individuals. The committee members must keep all matters related to investigation confidential.

Section 5 Report on the Results of Investigation

The committee immediately submits the investigation report to the president. The following information shall be specified within the investigation report.

1) Matters of violation of research ethics regulations

2) The process of investigation

3) Evidence of the violation(s)

4) Basis for the committee’s decision-making

5) The respondent’s answers and representations

Section 6 Disciplinary Procedure and Disciplinary Level

The senior board of directors decides the type and severity of disciplinary action after confirming the violation of research ethics regulations. The types of punishment are as follows.

1) Cautions and warnings

2) Prohibition of manuscript submission for a certain period of time (for a period of at least three years)

3) Suspension of membership

4) Member expulsion

Section 7 Follow-Up Measures

When the type of disciplinary action is decided upon by the senior board of directors, it is reported to the president, and the president must take the following actions.

1) The president must take measures to enforce disciplinary action according to the decision-making of the senior board of directors.

2) The committee notifies the decision on the website of the Society and then must submit a final investigation report to the National Research Foundation of Korea.



Article 1

This revision of the research ethics regulations will be placed into effect from February 23, 2022.


Article 2 

All members of the Society, as researchers, must pledge to abide by these research ethics regulations. New members must pledge to abide by the research ethics regulations at the time of their joining. Existing members are deemed to have pledged to comply with the research ethics regulations at the same time as enforcing the research ethics regulations without the requirement of a separate pledge.