eISSN : 2288-9000
pISSN : 1229-1935
Journal Information  l  e-Submission  l  View-FullText
Journal Information > Research publication ethics
 

Ethical Guidelines

 

The Journal of the Korean Electrochemical Society is the official journal of the Korean Electrochemical Society. It serves the electrochemistry profession and society by publishing technical papers containing the results of scientific and engineering research. The publication of such research will facilitate the development of the electrochemical society and build a systematic and esteemed network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. All articles that have been peer reviewed are a manifestation of scientific method applied to the studies. Therefore, it is paramount that the standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the publishing be defined. The editors of the journal, therefore, have outlined certain ethical guidelines for all engaged in the publication of electrochemical research, particularly, the editors, authors, and reviewers of the manuscripts submitted to the journal. By delineating these guidelines we do not propose that there exists a crisis with regard to ethical behavior in the field of research, but rather the belief that the adherence to high ethical standards is extremely crucial to the whole scientific enterprise, and thus, these standards require to be defined for the reference of all concerned. (2008-06-17)

 

1. Ethical Responsibilities of Journal Editors

 

• The editor shall not exercise any bias when considering the manuscripts submitted for publication. Each paper shall be assessed on the basis of its individuality, thus not regarding the author's gender, age, institutional affiliation, or any personal acquaintance that the editor may have with the author.

• The editor shall expediently review and process manuscript submitted for publication.

• The editor shall be sole responsible for the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript submitted to the journal for publication.

• Any advice that the editor may require with regard to a manuscript shall be received from specialists chosen solely for their expertise and fair judgment.

• The editor shall treat all contents of the manuscript submitted for publication as strictly confidential material and not disclose any information with regard to the manuscript to anyone but the author and designated reviewers until after the process of assessment is completed.

• The editor shall honor the author's individuality and intellectual independence.

 

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

 

• Authors shall furnish an accurate report of the research conducted and modify the results for statistical reasons only. It is the author's responsibility to ensure that the work that have submitted to the journal for publication has not been reported elsewhere.

• The submitted manuscript should be firmly based on scientific back grounds and comprise detailed conclusions of academic relevance. Reporting conclusions that have been published elsewhere is strongly not allowed unless there are scientifically essential reasons to do so. The author shall avoid presenting unnecessarily fragmented research results to the readers.

• All research works submitted to the journal shall contain verifiable details and references, permitting specialists to repeat and reevaluate the work. The authors are bound by the responsibility to use the journal space judiciously and economically as it is a valuable resource created at a considerable cost.

• The authors are required to make reasonable efforts to accurately describe reference material already open to the public. Moreover, authors should explicitly mention the sources referred results. In order to quote information that has been obtained through personal contacts or the assessment of the manuscripts, the author has to acquire the assent of the relevant sources.

• Publications that have influenced the submitted study as well as other publications guiding the readers promptly to previous works and essential to understanding the author's research results, except for anything considered to be of common knowledge, shall be cited by the authors. The authors may also include results opposed to author's results or ideas in the study.

• The journal regards the simultaneous submission by the authors of manuscripts containing essentially the same research to more than one journal for publication as inappropriate. However, the journal permits the submission of a manuscript that extends a previous published but brief preliminary account (such as short communications) of the same work. A the time of submission, however, the paper must contain academically significant results that have not been conveyed in preceding correspondences or letters, and any such preliminary communication shall be cite in the manuscript.

• The author may provide critical analyses of the works of other scientists. However, the journal will under no circumstances tolerate any personal criticism of other scientists.

• Those researchers who have significant contributed to the study described in the paper and shared responsibilities for the inferences shall be considered as co-authors. If a research advisor has contributed to his/her student's thesis by means of more than a mere review of the work, the research advisor can be cited as a co-author of the manuscript. Other contributions should be marked by footnotes or as an "Acknowledgment". The co-authors shall decide amongst themselves the order of the listing of their names in the manuscript, and this order shall be based on the degree of contribution to the manuscript. The co-author(s) responsible for the primary research shall be listed first. Each author's affiliation is the location he/she carried out the study. If there is any change in the affiliation after the paper has been submitted, this should be denoted accurately by a footnote.

• The author is expected to seriously consider the directions provided by reviewers and editors and attempt to incorporate suggestions of this nature in his/her revised manuscript. If the author does not concur with the directions, he/she is not required to provide a rationalized argument in support if the disagreement.

 

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers of Manuscripts

 

• The reviewer is expected to exercise objectivity during the review process, when judging the quality of a research paper, evaluating the experiments and the theories supporting them, the inferences of the studies, and the corroborated by appropriate scientific and literary standards. The journal shall not accept ay review that reflects personal scientific positions or hypotheses, which are not verifiable in their entirety. The reviewer is required to objectively assess the manuscript irrespective of whether the reviewer's own research is linked to the researcher's paper or whether the reviewer is in any way affiliated to the researcher.

• The journal expects the reviewer to respect the author's individual identity and intellectual distinction. The reviewer's report shall cover his/her judgment on the manuscript, pointing out any inadequate or questionable matter with an in-depth explanation. The reviewer's opinion should be well formatted, and any offensive comments made to the author will not be tolerated. The extraction of any information or supplementary materials from the author with a view to serve the vest interest of the reviewer is strictly disallowed.

• Any manuscript submitted to the journal shall be treated as confidential material by the reviewer. No interactions with anyone other than the researcher, except in extraordinary circumstances that require the reviewer to seek specific advice, and in such as situation, the reviewer will be required to disclose the identities of those consulted to the editor. Prior to publication, the contents of a manuscript cannot be referenced without the assent of the author.

• The reviewer should confirm that the citations of the work referred in the paper are accurate. If the reviewer discovers that the study described in the manuscript is similar to previously published work, the reviewer should be categorically convey to the editor.

• The reviewer is required to be punctual in submitting the assessment of the manuscript. If an appointed reviewer is of the opinion that he/she does not possess adequate qualifications to assess the assigned manuscript, he/she should immediately inform the editor.