| Home | E-Submission | Sitemap | Contact Us |  
Research and Publication Ethics > Editorial Policies > Research and Publication Ethics

Article 1 (Purpose)
The purpose of these regulations is to maintain and enhance the quality of 'Exercise Science,' the official publication of the Korean Society of Exercise Physiology (KSEP, hereafter referred to as the "Society"). This effort is guided by the following objectives:
Raise the ethical awareness of all researchers who contribute.
Ensure absolute objectivity and thoroughness in evaluations.
Preserve the ethical integrity and authenticity of all disseminated research.
Provide essential principles and guidance necessary to achieve the above goals.
By accomplishing these objectives, we are firmly dedicated to fulfilling our primary responsibility as a leading academic journal, thereby advancing the scholarly development of exercise physiology.
Article 2 (Applicability)
These regulations apply to all members of the Society and to authors who plan to submit their work to 'Exercise Science.'
Article 3 (Scope of Application)
These regulations have universal applicability, except when specific research areas are subject to distinct ethical and authenticity rules outlined in separate legal frameworks.
Article 4 (Compliance with Ethical Regulations)
Authors intending to submit to 'Exercise Science' must strictly adhere to the Research Ethical Regulations set forth by the Society (hereinafter referred to as the "Ethical Regulations"). Any violation of these regulations will be subject to appropriate disciplinary actions, as delineated in the Ethical Regulations and its accompanying implementation guidelines.
Article 5 (Research Contributors)
Research contributors are categorized into three roles: primary author, corresponding author, and co-authors, with their roles and responsibilities outlined as follows:
  • Paragraph 1. Definition of Co-author:
    Individuals who collaborate in research, actively participate in discussions, or make substantial contributions towards reaching research conclusions may be designated as co-authors or joint presenters. The determination lies with the principal investigator.
  • Paragraph 2. Scope of Co-author:
    Only those who have made substantial contributions to the research's planning, conceptualization, execution, results analysis, and drafting or writing of findings should be included as co-authors or presenters.
  • Paragraph 3. Primary and Corresponding Author:
    The order of authorship is determined based on the extent of contribution to the research, typically listing those with the most significant contributions first. The principal investigator may assume the role of the corresponding author. Additionally, during submission, the primary author is responsible for outlining the role and contribution of each listed author. (Revised on November 8, 2019)
  • Paragraph 4. Exclusion of Co-authors:
    Including individuals who did not make substantial contributions to the research process, or failing to correct the inclusion of such individuals in a paper or presentation, constitutes research misconduct.
  • Paragraph 5. Obligation to Clarify:
    Individuals listed as co-authors or presenters must be prepared to clarify their specific contributions to the research.
  • Paragraph 6. Acknowledgments:
    It is appropriate to express gratitude in research papers for shared research information or for assistance in obtaining research funds.
Article 6 (Research Ethics)
In order to uphold research ethics, researchers are obligated to adhere to the regulations specified in the following subsections:
  • Paragraph 1. Social Responsibility:
    Researchers must prioritize the safety, health, and well-being of society, conscientiously considering the potential societal implications of their research while diligently upholding their expertise.
  • Paragraph 2. Respect for Others:
    Researchers must maintain the dignity, property, reputation, and privacy of others, ensuring no harm or violation of rights. They should practice equality, regardless of race, religion, gender, disability, age, or nationality.
  • Paragraph 3. Professional Attitude:
    Researchers should commit to the ongoing enhancement of their technical competencies.
  • Paragraph 4. Authenticity of Research:
    Honesty and integrity should govern all research activities. Judgments and opinions should be founded on academic evidence, avoiding statements beyond their area of expertise.
  • Paragraph 5. Publication Ethics:
    When disseminating research results, researchers are required to:
    • i. Abstain from falsifying educational, professional, or research credentials.
    • ii. Claim authorship only for research to which they have genuinely contributed, giving appropriate credit where due.
    • iii. Ensure authorship and author ranking in publications accurately reflect actual contributions, irrespective of hierarchical positions.
    • iv. For condensed theses, it is recommended that both the student and advisor be recognized as co-authors.
    • v. Author affiliations should represent their status at the time of the research; any subsequent changes can be noted accordingly.
    • vi. Acknowledge non-academic support, whether administrative or technical, in the acknowledgments.
    • vii. Base discussions regarding the research in publications, lectures, or presentations on scientific evidence and factual accuracy.
Article 7 (Research Content and Data)
The following principles must be followed for both research content and its associated data:
  • Paragraph 1. Significance of Research:
    Research articles should offer a valuable contribution to both the academic community and society at large. They ought to explicitly specify whether their findings introduce novel and innovative discoveries or perspectives, or if they present a renewed interpretation or progression of existing research.
  • Paragraph 2. Precision of Research Material:
    Researchers need to diligently verify that the same research and its findings have not been previously undertaken or published. The decisions regarding what to include or omit from the findings should be thoughtful, avoiding arbitrary choices.
  • Paragraph 3. Definition of Research Data:
    Research data encompasses primary data, which originates directly from laboratory outcomes or statistical analysis from surveys, as well as secondary data, which involves the processing and analysis of these primary datasets.
  • Paragraph 4. Authentication of Research Data:
    Research data must be replicable by others under the identical conditions. To ensure reproducibility or to address verification requests arising from inadvertent errors or misunderstandings, researchers have a responsibility to provide a comprehensive and precise record of the entire research process, starting from the initial planning phase through to the results obtained.
Article 8 (Research Misconduct)
Research misconduct (hereinafter referred to as "misconduct") refers to fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, improper authorship, and other similar actions carried out in the proposal, execution, reporting, and presentation of research. Even if research data is accurate, distorting research results intentionally for personal benefit is deemed as inappropriate research conduct, and detailed as follows:.
  • Paragraph 1. Fabrication:
    Crafting fabricated outcomes or data without actual measurement or investigation.
  • Paragraph 2. Falsification:
    Artificially manipulating research materials, equipment, or procedures, or selectively modifying or omitting data to present misleading content or results.
  • Paragraph 3. Plagiarism:
    Portraying or publishing someone else's original research ideas as one's own without appropriate citation. This includes unauthorized utilization of another individual's concepts or findings. Additionally, republishing one's previously published work without proper acknowledgment, regardless of language, also falls within this definition. (Revised on November 8, 2019)
  • Paragraph 4. Improper Authorship:
    Withholding authorship from individuals who have genuinely contributed without valid reasons, or attributing authorship to those who have not contributed.
  • Paragraph 5. Exemption from Citation Requirement:
    Referencing information from university textbooks or public datasets as common knowledge without citation is not categorized as plagiarism.
  • Paragraph 6. Unjust Replication of Publication:
    It is inappropriate to publish the same research findings in identical or different languages. This encompasses cases where there is a substantial similarity in data and wording, or when results are republished without proper acknowledgment in another language. (Revised on November 8, 2019)
  • Paragraph 7. Exemption from Replicated Publication:
    Successive publications, wherein an initial brief paper is followed by a more detailed version or the addition of supplementary data or interpretations, do not qualify as duplicate publications.
  • Paragraph 8. Rectification of Mistakes/Errors:
    Researchers are obliged to swiftly correct any inadvertent errors in their published work. Intentional delays or negligence in fulfilling this responsibility are considered inappropriate research conduct.
  • Paragraph 9. Obligations and Consequences:
    Researchers are responsible for preventing issues such as submitting the same manuscripts to multiple journals, publishing in multiple outlets, incomplete publications, or plagiarism. Violations of these norms may result in disciplinary actions in accordance with the regulations of the academic society.
  • Paragraph 10. Expanded Definition of Misconduct:
    In addition to the previously mentioned types of misconduct, the academic community has the authority to consider actions that "significantly deviate from established norms within each academic field" and acts that "intentionally obstruct investigations into one's own or others' misconduct or cause harm to whistleblowers" as misconduct. Such behaviors can be included in the list if they are deemed essential for investigation or prevention.
Article 9 (Protection of Research Subjects)
During the review process, researchers may be requested to submit subject consent forms and data related to subject selection, if necessary. To ensure the ethical treatment and protection of research subjects, the following provisions are set:
  • Paragraph 1. Human Subjects:
    • First, researchers are bound to uphold the rights, health, and welfare of their human subjects. They must avoid any research that infringes upon these principles.
    • Second, privacy Protection: The personal data of participants should be kept confidential.
    • Third, informed Consent: Participants or their guardians must be thoroughly informed about the research's goals, methods, content, expected benefits, and potential risks. Only after acquiring voluntary written consent should the research proceed.
    • Fourth, special Consideration for Vulnerable Subjects: Extra care should be extended towards subjects at risk, ensuring their protection both during the consent process and throughout the research. Researchers are asked to carefully consider the potential implications (including inadvertent consequences) of research on human groups defined by attributes of ethnicity, national or social origin, age, disease, disability or other status. Authors need to contextualize their findings to minimize as much as possible potential misuse or risks of harm to the studied groups in the public sphere.
    • Fifth, institutional Review: Research involving human subjects should commence only after receiving the green light from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) as stipulated by the "Life Ethics and Safety Law Article 14".
  • Paragraph 2. Animal Subjects:
    The welfare of animal subjects is paramount. Researchers should follow these rules.
    • First, minimize pain and distress: Every measure should be taken to reduce the suffering of experimental animals.
    • Second, prioritize alternatives: Utilize non-animal models or lower-order animals whenever feasible.
    • Third, limit the number: Only use the minimal number of animals necessary to ensure the study's validity.
    • Fourth, seek institutional approval: Begin animal-related research only after securing approval from an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC).
  • Paragraph 3. Prior Consent:
    Researchers must emphasize to participants or their guardians the right to decline participation at any stage, and this right must be respected without prejudice.
Article 10 (Ethics of Paper Review Committee Members)
Committee members involved in the review of papers must uphold the following principles:
  • Paragraph 1. Objectivity and Fairness: Members should prioritize academic and societal interests above personal gain. Reviews must be conducted with fairness, neutrality, and objectivity.
  • Paragraph 2. Confidentiality: It's a breach of research ethics to utilize information accessed during the review process for personal research or any other unauthorized purposes.
  • Paragraph 3. Constructive Feedback: In case of disagreements with the perspectives of reviewers or editorial board members, objections should be based on clear and rational grounds, avoiding subjective or emotional biases.
  • Paragraph 4. Copyright and Intellectual Property: All potential issues related to copyright and intellectual property rights arising from the publication must be resolved. By default, the society retains the copyright. Exceptions may occur under special circumstances, such as for republishing in electronic formats.
Article 11 (Education on Research Ethics)
The society is committed to the ongoing education of its affiliated researchers on matters of research ethics. This includes, but is not limited to, guidelines on ethical practices, the definition of misconduct, response protocols, and verification processes. This education is disseminated through channels such as academic journals, newsletters, website notifications, and various academic initiatives. Furthermore, the society supports the creation and distribution of educational materials on research ethics.
Article 12 (Establishment of Ethical Regulations)
The association is mandated to create and manage ethical regulation procedures tailored to its unique conditions. These regulations encompass:
  • i. The formation and functioning of the ethics committee.
  • ii. Reporting mechanisms and procedural workflows.
  • iii. Disciplinary methods and their categorization.
  • iv. Proclamations of disciplinary resolutions.
  • v. Opportunities for re-evaluations.
  • vi. Protocols for revoking disciplinary actions and reinstating qualifications.
    • Paragraph 1. These regulations are not exclusive to the journal ‘Exercise Science’ but extend to all academic endeavors and research projects under the association's purview.
    • Paragraph 2. The Chairperson of the Research Ethics Committee determines these procedures, ensuring the considerations of the ethics committee are prioritized.
Article 13 (Authority and Role of the Ethics Committee)
The authority and function of the Ethics Committee are outlined as per the subsequent clauses:
  • Paragraph 1. The Ethics Committee is responsible for establishing a designated channel for reporting misconduct associated with research and developmental projects under its purview. The Committee's task is to assess whether research institutions have fairly and rationally verified the authenticity of their research. Based on this assessment, the Committee will then determine and implement necessary follow-up actions.
  • Paragraph 2. To foster a culture of research ethics and bolster the genuineness of research, the Ethics Committee possesses the authority to formulate and enact necessary measures, which may include both incentives and disincentives.
  • Paragraph 3. The Ethics Committee may embark on an investigation to verify research authenticity under the following circumstances:
    • i. When there's a valid contention from either a whistleblower or the subject under examination and a re-investigation is deemed requisite.
    • ii. Upon detecting significant shortcomings in the research that warrant a re-investigation.
Article 14 (Protection of Whistleblower's Rights)
Whistleblowers' rights are safeguarded as detailed in the subsequent provisions:
  • Paragraph 1. A whistleblower is defined as an individual who informs the pertinent Ethics Committee about any evidence or facts related to potential misconduct.
  • Paragraph 2. Ideally, whistleblowers should submit their reports in a documented manner, and it's recommended that they reveal their identity. However, even anonymous reports, when submitted in writing or via email with specifics such as the research project or paper title, detailed misconduct, and supporting evidence, must be accorded the same gravity as identified reports.
  • Paragraph 3. It's imperative to protect whistleblowers from retaliatory actions, including but not limited to disciplinary actions, unfavorable changes in status, discrimination in workplace conditions, undue pressure, or any other harm resulting from their disclosure. Necessary safeguards should be established to uphold this principle.
  • Paragraph 4. The confidentiality of the whistleblower's identity must be maintained, unless they wish otherwise. Under no circumstances should a whistleblower face the adverse consequences mentioned in Paragraph 3 due to their disclosure.
  • Paragraph 5. If a whistleblower desires updates on the investigation's procedures and timeline following their report, they may seek this information from the respective academic institution or the overseeing committee. The Ethics Committee is obliged to provide a timely response to such inquiries.
  • Paragraph 6. Protections do not extend to whistleblowers who knowingly report false information or those who could reasonably have been aware of its falsehood.
Article 15 (Protecting the Rights of Individual(s) Unver Investigation)
The rights of individuals under investigation are upheld as detailed in the subsequent provisions:
  • Paragraph 1. The term "individual(s) under investigation" pertains to any person subjected to a misconduct probe, whether due to direct reporting, acknowledgment, or arising suspicions, excluding those who participate merely as references or witnesses during the investigative procedures.
  • Paragraph 2. The Ethics Committee holds the responsibility to ensure that the integrity, honor, and rights of the individual(s) under investigation are not unjustly compromised during the authentication process.
  • Paragraph 3. Allegations or suspicions of misconduct must remain confidential until a definitive judgment is determined.
  • Paragraph 4. The individual(s) under investigation retains the right to solicit information about the misconduct inquiry, its methodologies, and its timeline from the academic committee or the overseeing committee.
Article 16 (Recusal, Avoidance, and Exclusion of the Review)
Individuals should be excluded from the review process if they are in the case of the following.
  • Paragraph 1. In case they are affiliated with the same institution as the corresponding author(s), or have co-authored in published articles within the last 3 years.
  • Paragraph 2. In case they are a familial relationship with the corresponding author(s). (Revised on November 8, 2019).
Article 17 (Conflict of Interest)
During submission, authors should declare any (potential) conflicts of interest related to the manuscript. If there is nothing to declare, state “None”. (Revised on November 8, 2019).
Article 18 (Paper Withdrawal) (Established on August 12, 2022)
  • Paragraph 1. Withdrawal of the Manuscript Under Review:
    • i. Either the author or the editorial committee may request the withdrawal of the manuscript. The party making the request should submit the manuscript withdrawal request form to the academic society.
    • ii. The form should include the reasons for the withdrawal and the authors’ handwritten signatures.
    • iii. The withdrawal arise from possible ethical transgressions, (e.g., duplication, fabrication) should be reported to the Editorial Committee and the Academic Society's Ethics Committee.
  • Paragraph 2. Withdrawal of a Published Article:
    • i. A withdrawal request for a published article can come from the author(s), the sponsoring institution(s), the Editorial Committee, or the Academic Community. An article withdrawal request form should be submitted to the Academic Society.
    • ii. The party requesting the withdrawal should clearly state their reasons in the withdrawal request form. After confirmation of the information, both the requester and all relevant authors need to endorse the form with their own signatures.
    • iii. For cases where the paper is found to breach research ethics significantly - instances include duplication, self-plagiarism, falsification, or fabrication - the issue is escalated to the Academic Society's Ethics Committee for possible punitive measures, determined by the breach's gravity.
    • iv. Upon a withdrawal request is approved, the Editor-in-Chief announces the decision on the journal's webpage. Additionally, public access to the full text and PDF versions of the article will be restricted.
    ▶Notice of Article Withdrawal◀
    As of [Date: xxxx-year xx-month xx-day], the following article has been formally withdrawn:
    i. Withdrawn Article: [Author Name (Publication Year). Paper Title. Exercise Science. Volume(Issue), pages.]
    ii. Reason for Withdrawal: [Specify the reason.]
Reviewer Guideline
endnote style download
Email Alert
Author's Index
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
Korean Society of Exercise Physiology
Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
Similarity Check
Crossref Cited-by Linking
Funder Registry
Editorial Office
The Korean Society of Exercise Physiology
Dept. of Healthcare and Science, Dong-A University, 37, Nakdong-daero 550beon-gil, Saha-gu, Busan 49315, Korea
TEL: +82-51-200-7517   E-mail: editor@ksep-es.org
Editorial Assistant: Taewan Kim +82-10-4019-0208
About |  Browse Articles |  Current Issue |  For Authors and Reviewers
Copyright © The Korean Society of Exercise Physiology.                 Developed in M2PI