Article 1 (Purpose) These ethical regulations are aimed to promote academic development by setting forth the ethics-related matters regarding the findings that will be published in the ¡°Molecules and Cells¡±, a journal of the Korean Society for Molecular and Cellular Biology.


Article 2 (Definition of terms)
  1. Research frauds refer to forgeries, falsifications, plagiarisms, double publications, unreasonable author indications, etc, as seen in the proposals, performances, result reports, presentations, etc. of research. Their details are as follows:
    1. Forgery: Refers to the act of forging non-existent data or findings etc.
    2. Falsification: Refers to the act of distorting research contents or results by fabricating the materials, devices, processes, etc of research artificially or transforming, deleting or adding the data willfully.
    3. Plagiarism: Refers to the act of announcing a study without specifying or disclosing its source. In addition, when re-publishing an article or a book (or its part) already published without specifying its source, it corresponds to the self-plagiarism that violates the first disclosure principle of findings.
    4. Double publication: Refers to publishing completely or almost identical research contents in different academic journals twice or more.
    5. Unreasonable author indication: Refers to not qualifying, without reasonable reason, a person who has contributed to research contents or results in scientific or technical terms for authorship, or to qualifying a person who has not contributed to them in scientific or technical terms for authorship.
    6. Act of interfering with the examination on his/her own or another person¡¯s fraudulent suspicion intentionally or damaging an informant.
    7. Act of proposing, forcing or threatening another person to commit fraudulent acts.
    8. Other acts that seriously escape the scope normally acceptable in academic research.
  2. ¡°The informant¡± refers to a person who recognized any research fraud and let the Society know its facts or evidences.
  3. ¡°The examinee¡± refers to a person who is examined on research fraud according to the report of an informant or the cognizance of the Society, or a person who is examined, since he or she is presumed, during examination, to have participated in research fraud. A reference or witness during examination shall not be called an examinee.
  4. ¡°Examination¡± refers to a procedure to determine whether the Society needs to examine the suspicion of research fraud officially and to verify whether the suspicion of research fraud is true or not.
  5. ¡°Judgment¡± refers to a procedure to determine official research results and to inform the determination to an informant or examinee.


Article 3 (Ethical requirements for authors)
  1. (Author¡¯s responsibilities) Each author shall precisely write and answer for only the results of the research he or she really made or contributed to, which shall be recognized as his or her achievement. He or she may refer to another author¡¯s findings several times, specifying their sources, but it shall belong to plagiarism presenting all or part of them as if they originally belonged to him or her. The corresponding author shall represent joint authors, answering for data accuracy, author¡¯s name, final draft approval by every author, answers to all correspondences and questions, etc.
  2. (Management of data and findings) Data shall be collected and recorded in reliable, valid and appropriate ways, kept during a certain period, thus being made available if necessary.
  3. (Sequence of authors) Authors shall be arranged in order according to the extents of their contribution to research under mutual consent.
  4. (Prohibition of double publication) No author may attempt at the double publication of his or her study (including that planned to publish or under examination). When wanting to publish his or her study using another one already published in another academic journal, he or she shall offer the information on the previous publication to the editors of the journal he or she want to contribute to and shall follow the editors¡¯ judgment of whether the act is double publication.
  5. (Prohibition of plagiarism) No author may attempt at plagiarism.
  6. (Author¡¯s revision of manuscript) Any author shall accept the opinions of editors and judges to the maximum in his or her study, and when dissenting from the opinions he or she shall offer the grounds and reasons to editors (the committee of editors).


Article 4 (Ethical requirements for editors)
  1. (Responsibilities and duties of editors)Editors shall be responsible for deciding whether to publish a contributed manuscript, ensure the truthfulness and fairness of judgment, and respect an author¡¯s personality and independence as a scholar.
  2. (Fairness in selecting editors) Editors shall entrust the judgment of the manuscript to the judges that have the expertise on the field involved and the objective and fair ability of judgment. In case of entrustment, judgment shall be made objectively by excluding the judges who are too friendly or hostile toward the author.
  3. (Maintenance of secrecy) Editors shall not reveal the matters on the author or the contents of the manuscript until a decision is made on the publication of the study. In addition, the editors¡¯ and judges¡¯ real names shall be kept secret even after the decision of publication.


Article 5 (Ethical requirements for judges)
  1. (Responsibilities and duties of judges) Within a period specified by judgment regulations, judges shall carefully evaluate the manuscripts editors entrust, and inform judgment results to the editors. If a judge considers himself or herself to be unqualified for judgment, he or she shall inform editors of the fact immediately.
  2. (Fairness of judgment) Each judge shall evaluate every manuscript objectively and fairly in accordance with strict standards in terms of the quality, experimentality, theoreticity and interpretation of study. He or she may not exclude any manuscript from publication without specifying sufficient ground, and shall understand and evaluate every manuscript reasonably.
  3. (Unethical acts of judges)
    1. Judges shall respect the personality and independence of authors and not use any expression to despise or insult the authors, but use polite and soft expressions. In evaluation, they shall explain their opinions on each study appropriately and the reasons for complementing the study if necessary.
    2. Judges may not entrust any third party or graduate student with their judgment task.
    3. Judges may not keep any manuscript without destroying it.
    4. (Maintenance of secrecy) Each judge shall keep every manuscript secret. He or she may not use or disclose the manuscript¡¯s contents without consent of its author prior to its publication. He or she shall keep his or her and editor¡¯s names secret.


Article 6 (Enforcement directions for ethical regulations)
  1. (Oath of ethical behaviors)When joining the Society, new members shall pledge to obey the ethical regulations. The existing members shall be considered to have already pledged to do so.
  2. (Report of ethical regulations¡¯ violation and protection of informants)
    1. If a member recognizes another member¡¯s violation of any ethical regulation, he or she shall make the member correct the problem by reminding the member of the regulations. However, if the problem is not corrected or any clear case of violation is revealed, the fact may be reported to the Ethics Committee of the Society. The Committee may not disclose the identity of a member who reported the problem.
  3. (Composition of the Ethics Committee) The Ethics Committee shall be composed of several commissioners, including the society journal¡¯s editors, and its chairman shall be recommended by the Board of Directors and confirmed by the Board of Representatives and the General Meeting in accordance with Clause 4, Article 21 of the Society¡¯s articles of association. The commissioners, excluding the Society journal editors, shall be appointed by the Society president upon recommendation of the chairman.
  4. (Authority of the Ethics Committee) The Ethics Committee shall carefully examine
    the report of ethical violation by means of informant(s), examinee(s), witness(es), and evidences etc, and may recommend Society president to take appropriate disciplinary actions, if the problem turns out to be true.
  5. (Examination and discrimination of the Ethics Committee) Any member who has been reported for violating ethical regulations shall cooperate with the examination of the Ethics Committee. The non-cooperation with the examination shall be considered to be against the ethical regulations.
  6. (Assurance of defense opportunities) Any member reported for violating ethical regulations shall be given the opportunities to defend himself or herself.
  7. (Secrecy protection for examinees) The Ethics Committee may not disclose the identity of any member in question until a final decision is made by the Society on the violation of ethical regulations.
  8. (Disciplinary procedure) When recommended to take disciplinary measures by the Ethics Committee, Society president shall make a final decision on whether to do so and on the disciplinary details, if discipline is decided at the Board of Directors.
  9. (Treatment of research frauds) The examination results of any research fraud shall be reported to the Society general meeting, and the records involved shall be kept at the Society for five years from the time point when the treatment has been finished. If the research fraud turns out to be true, it shall be announced, the next follow-up measures may be taken, and the decisions on the measures shall follow the resolutions of the Board of Directors:
    1. Notifying a researcher and his or her organization of the Society¡¯s official correction demands or disciplinary measures;
    2. Announcing the research fraud fact in the first issue of an Society journal published after such suspicion turns out to be true;
    3. Recognition cancellation or correction demand of the study involved;
    4. Exchange of the persons involved in the study;
    5. Interruption or disqualification of Society membership during an appropriate period;
    6. Prohibition of the article contribution to the Society journal during a certain period;
    7. Report to legal institutions;
    8. Other measures judged to be necessary by the Society.
  10. If it is confirmed no research fraud was committed, the Committee shall take appropriate measures to restore the honor of the examinee involved.
  11. (Revision of ethical regulations) The revision of ethical regulations shall follow the rules amendment procedures of the Society. If ethical regulations are revised, each member shall be considered to pledge to obey new regulations without additional pledge.