Ethical Code

This Code defines the principles and standards of research ethics guiding the International Journal of Diaspora & Cultural Criticism, published by The Center for Asia & Diaspora.
The ethical code promotes a healthy climate for research and refrains from any fraudulent research activities in association with contributors, reviewers and the editing committee.

The followings activities are regarded as misbehavior that is contrary to the ethical code.
The applicant must not falsify, distort, plagiarize, falsely attribute a research paper, or publish one’s paper twice.

• Forgery: the act of making false data or research results that do not exist
• Modulation: an act of distorting research content or results by arbitrarily modifying or deleting data
• Plagiarism: copying, stealing or making use of original ideas or works of others without acknowledging the original source or using proper citation. Examples include:
  • When using all or part of a previous researcher’s work without indicating the source.
  • When the word or sentence structure of another person’s work is partly modified but the source is not cited.
  • When the original ideas of others are used without citation.
  • When the work of another person is translated and used without citation.
• Indication of unjustified authorship: defined as the act of failing to recognise people who have contributed to the research and/or providing recognition to people who did not contribute to the research (The co-authors involving the special relationship are evaluated separately by the ethics committee in accordance with the July 17, 2018 “Guidelines for Securing Research Ethics“ [Order No. 263 of the Ministry of Education]).
• Inappropriate duplicate publication: defined as an act of publishing the same or similar academic work twice without indicating original sources or valid citations.
• Any other act that falls into the category of Plagiarism.

• The editing committee provides an impartial and objective process of evaluation of the manuscript.
• The editing committee must not disclose the author and content of the manuscript until the final decision is made.

• Peer reviewers should evaluate manuscripts in an impartial and objective manner following the evaluation regulations provided by the editing committee.
• Peer reviewers must respect the independence and personality of the author, and should not express the derogatory remarks on "peer-reviewed assessment sheet."
• Peer reviewers should maintain confidentiality regarding the manuscript until it is finally published in the Journal.
• If rejecting a manuscript, peer reviewers should provide the grounds for rejection in full through the "peer-reviewed assessment sheet."

The applicant of the manuscript and the people who are involved with the publication of the International Journal of Diaspora & Cultural Criticism must adhere to the pledge of the ethical regulation.

The Ethics committee as a special committee deliberates and makes decisions about potential violations of research ethics that guide the Journal.

• If violation of research ethics is found or detected after an anonymous tip, the chairperson of the Ethics Committee will convenes the committee to deliberate on the alleged violation.
• In the case of any conflict of interest being identified related to the chairperson, the chairperson shall not attend the conference, and one of the Ethics Committee members shall be appointed as the chairperson in their place.

• The chairperson of Ethics Committee shall convene meetings as necessary.
• The Ethics Committee Conference will make decisions based on majority vote.
• The conference and minutes of ethic committee must be kept confidential

• Reports of violation of the Journal’s ethical code is accepted in writing.
• Upon receipt of a hearing request, the Journal publisher will immediately convene the committee for deliberation.

• The ethics committee shall decide on the procedures that must be followed duringthe hearing process.
• The ethics committee will investigate and interviews the authors of the manuscript, requester of hearing, and the peer reviewers of the manuscript before coming to a decision about potential violations of the Research Ethics code.
• The ethics committee will give the applicant sufficient opportunities for explanation, and if the applicant does not comply with the investigation the applicant can be considered in violation of ethical regulations.
• The members of ethics committee must not disclose the identity of the applicant and the process of the conference until the final decision is made.
• The ethics committee prepares a document of the whole process of the conference. A document about the hearing decision must be signed by all members of ethics committee, sealed, and should be kept for 5 years.
• The whole hearing process will be completed within 6 months.

The ethics committee immediately notifies the result of hearing to the publisher of the journal. The hearing report will specify the following:

• A violation of ethical code.
• A violation of ethical code.
• Grounds of hearing result and related evidence.
• Explanation and process of the applicant.

• If any violation of ethical rules of the Journal is detected, the Ethics Committee must notify the head of the Journal Publishing Institute of cancellation of the article publication as well as penalties for the contributor.
• The head of the Journal Publishing Institute must notify the contributor of the consequences and penalties of the violation.
• The details of the penalties are as follow.
  • Contributing papers to this Journal will be prohibited for five years.
  • The contributor must make a public apology on the Institute’s website
  • The Journal will retract the article and delete the article file on the Institute’s website.

• Evaluators are selected from those who are not affiliated with the same institution that the contributor belongs to.
• Evaluators are selected from those who are not related as family or alumni or those who are in interest-free status with the contributor.
• Corresponding authors must submit proofs of their specific contributions to the article and of previous communications with the main author regarding their collaborative works.

• Supplementary 1. The regulation is in force via the approval of the General Assembly on October 25th of 2007.
• Supplementary 2. The regulation is revised and carried out on September 1st of 2013.
• Supplementary 3. The regulation is revised and carried out on January 1st of 2021.