Purpose

The purpose of these regulations is to establish sound research ethics by defining the principles and standards of research ethics that authors, editorial board members, and reviewers must adhere to in relation to the publication of the *Journal of Korean Dental Association*. It also specifies the procedures and standards for handling research misconduct.

Bioethics and Consent

• ① All research involving humans or animals must be reviewed by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the responsible research institution or the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) before starting, and this must be stated in the manuscript.
• ② When human subjects are involved, researchers must ensure that participants or their guardians fully understand the purpose of the study and any mental or physical risks, and must obtain written consent, which should be noted in the manuscript, in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
• ③ When presenting photographs or photographic data of research subjects, the identity of the subject must not be revealed. If the subject's identity is disclosed, written consent must be stated.
• ④ When using experimental animals, the manuscript must present the measures taken to minimize pain and discomfort to the animals and ensure that the procedures comply with the ethical guidelines of the research institution and the NIH Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. The types, doses, administration routes, and methods of the drugs given to the animals must be specifically described.
• ⑤ The editorial board may request submission of written consent and ethical review approval if necessary.

Responsibilities of Authors

• ① Authors must not engage in any of the following acts of research misconduct:

• 1. Fabricating or falsifying research data, results, or materials (fabrication).
• 2. Manipulating research materials, equipment, or procedures, or altering or deleting data to distort the research content or results (falsification).
• 3. Plagiarizing by using someone else’s original ideas or creations without proper citation:

• a. Using all or part of another's research without attribution.
• b. Using another's wording or sentence structure without proper citation.
• c. Using another’s original ideas without proper citation.
• d. Translating another's work without citation.

• ② Authors must take all reasonable steps to verify that the content has not been previously published.
• ③ Authors must submit papers that contain academically valuable conclusions supported by comprehensive arguments. If submitting a paper with the same conclusions as a previously published work, it must present significant new academic value.
• ④ Authors must properly cite sources when referring to published scholarly material and must disclose the source of any material not considered common knowledge. Information obtained via personal communication should only be cited with the explicit consent of the researcher providing the information.
• ⑤ Authors may not submit manuscripts that have already been published or are under review by other journals. Likewise, a manuscript accepted or under review by this journal may not be submitted to other journals.
• ⑥ Authors should make the best effort to incorporate the opinions of the editorial board and reviewers into their manuscript. If they disagree with the feedback, they should notify the editorial board with reasons for their disagreement.
• ⑦ Regarding author qualifications:

• 1. All individuals who made significant scholarly contributions to the research and share responsibility for the results should be co-authors.
• 2. If the manuscript is based on a thesis, except for review articles, the student and supervisor should be co-authors.
• 3. Individuals who did not contribute to the scholarly work should not be included as co-authors, and administrative or non-scholarly support should be acknowledged in footnotes or the acknowledgments section.
• 4. The corresponding author must obtain clear consent from all co-authors before listing them as such.
• 5. The order of co-authors should be decided based on the agreement of the co-authors and should reflect the level of contribution to the research.
• 6. Authors' affiliations should be listed based on their affiliation at the time the research was conducted. If their affiliation changes before submission, the new affiliation should be noted in a footnote.

Responsibilities of Editorial Board Members

• ① Editorial board members must handle submitted manuscripts impartially, based solely on the quality of the manuscript, without regard to the author’s gender, age, institutional affiliation, or personal relationships.
• ② Editorial board members must keep the contents of the manuscript confidential until a decision is made regarding its publication.
• ③ Editorial board members must respect the dignity and academic independence of the authors.
• ④ The editorial board will ensure the anonymity of both the authors and reviewers to maintain fairness in the review process.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

• ① Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts assigned by the editorial board according to the review guidelines and contribute to academic progress.
• ② Reviewers must respect the integrity and independence of the authors.
• ③ Reviewers must maintain high academic standards and evaluate the manuscript objectively and impartially, avoiding judgments based on personal academic beliefs or unverified assumptions.
• ④ Reviewers must provide detailed feedback in their review report, including reasoning for their opinions. They must not request additional data or clarifications for personal purposes.
• ⑤ Reviewers must not cite the content of a manuscript before it is published without the author's consent.
• ⑥ If the content of the manuscript is very similar to a paper already published in another journal, reviewers must inform the editorial board.
• ⑦ Reviewers should complete their evaluations promptly and notify the editorial board if they believe they are not qualified to review the manuscript.

Responsibility for Integrity Verification

• ① The responsibility for verifying misconduct lies with the research institution where the research was conducted. If misconduct is suspected or reported, the institution must promptly investigate and transfer the relevant information to the editorial board for further action.
• ② If the research institution is unable to conduct its own investigation, the editorial board may form an investigation committee to verify the misconduct.

Principles for Forming an Investigation Committee

• ① The investigation committee operates as a standing committee, and the editorial board chair must form the committee within 30 days of receiving a report of misconduct.
• ② The committee must consist of at least five members, including a chairperson, appointed by the editorial board chair.

Authority of the Investigation Committee

• ① The investigation committee can request the attendance of whistleblowers, subjects of investigation, witnesses, and other relevant individuals for testimony. The subject of investigation must comply with such requests.
• ② The committee may request the submission of relevant materials from the subject of investigation.
• ③ The committee can recommend appropriate sanctions to the editorial board chair and the head of the relevant research institution for those found guilty of misconduct.

Principles of Integrity Verification

• ① The investigation committee has the responsibility to prove whether misconduct occurred. However, if the subject of investigation deliberately damages or refuses to submit the requested materials, the burden of proof falls on the subject regarding the authenticity of the material.
• ② The investigation committee must ensure that both the whistleblower and the subject of investigation are given equal opportunities to present their views and raise objections, and should inform them of the procedures in advance.
• ③ The identity of the subject of investigation must remain confidential until a decision on misconduct is made.

Integrity Verification Procedure

• ① The verification process consists of preliminary investigation, main investigation, and determination.
• ② The verification procedures shall adhere to the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology’s *Guidelines for Ensuring Research Ethics* (No. 263).

Reporting of Investigation Results

• ① The investigation committee must report the investigation results and decisions to the editorial board.
• ② The report must include:

• 1. The content of the report.
• 2. The type of misconduct investigated.
• 3. The names of the investigation committee members.
• 4. Whether a main investigation was conducted and the basis for the decision (for preliminary investigations).
• 5. The role of the subject of investigation and the determination of whether misconduct occurred (for main investigations).
• 6. Relevant evidence and witnesses (for main investigations).
• 7. Objections or statements from the whistleblower and subject of investigation, and how they were handled (for main investigations).

Sanctions for Violating Ethical Regulations

If an author violates the ethical regulations specified in Article 3 or if the investigation committee recommends sanctions, the editorial board will take the following actions:

• 1. Issue a formal warning.
• 2. Remove the manuscript from the *Journal of Korean Dental Association*’s publication list.
• 3. Ban the violator from submitting manuscripts to the journal for two years.

Miscellaneous

Any matters not specified in these regulations will be decided by the editorial board.

**Appendix**

Effective Date

These regulations will be implemented from the date approved by the Board of Directors.