Research Ethics Guidelines

Research Ethics Regulations

 Article 1 (Purpose) 

The Research Ethics Regulations of the Asian Society of Health and Exercise Science (hereinafter referred to as “the Society”) aim to define the ethics and integrity of research activities related to the Society and establish procedures for addressing violations of these principles.

 Article 2 (Scope of Application) 

These regulations apply to researchers participating in any research activities related to the Society, including presenting at conferences organized or co-organized by the Society, submitting and publishing papers in the Society’s journal, Asian Journal of Exercise and Health Science.

 Article 3 (Research Integrity) 

Researchers must adhere to the following principles: 

1. Researchers must be honest in generating research ideas, conducting research, and deriving research results. 

2. Researchers must prevent any unethical research practices. 

3. Researchers must respect intellectual property rights and refrain from infringing upon them. 

4. Researchers must conduct conscientious research that contributes to societal advancement.

 Article 4 (Definition of Research Misconduct) 

Research misconduct is defined as acts of fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, and other dishonest behaviors in the proposal, conduct, review, or reporting of research results. The scope and definition of research misconduct are as follows: 

1. Fabrication refers to manipulating research data, equipment, or processes, or altering or omitting data or results to misrepresent the content in research records. 

2. Falsification refers to artificially manipulating research processes and results, or distorting research content or results by arbitrarily altering or deleting data. 

3. Plagiarism refers to copying completely or after some altercations another person’s research (ideas, writing, structure, design, images, plans, code, etc.) or one’s own previously written work without proper citation. 

4. Duplicate Publication refers to publishing the same research paper in two or more journals. The same research means using the same or substantially similar data (subjects) and methods. 

5. False Authorship refers to not assigning authorship to individuals who contributed to the research without acceptable reason, or granting authorship to individuals who did not contribute for reasons such as gratitude or courtesy. 

6. Self-Plagiarism refers to reusing a previously published paper (or substantial parts of it) or the same (or substantially similar) data without proper cross-referencing or citation in either the same or different languages, particularly in a method that the Editorial Board and the readers cannot recognize that the content was previously published. 

7. Other Misconduct includes intentionally obstructing investigations into allegations of misconduct, causing harm to whistleblowers, improperly managing research funds, or violating the principles of democratic and transparent research activities.

 Article 5 (Establishment of Research Ethics Committee) 

To review matters concerning research ethics, a Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Committee) shall be established within the Society.

 Article 6 (Composition and Operation of the Research Ethics Committee) 

1. If the Chairperson of the Editorial Board recognizes the need to review matters related to research ethics, a temporary Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Committee”) will be established within the Editorial Board. 

2. The Committee shall be composed of 3 to 5 members, including the Chairperson. 

3. The Chairperson of the Editorial Board also serves as the Chairperson of the Committee. 

4. The Committee members are appointed by the Chairperson from among those recommended by the Editorial Board. 

5. The Committee shall be validly constituted with the attendance of a majority of its members, and decisions will be made by a majority of the attendees. Proxy attendance is acknowledged but does not grant voting rights. 

6. Members involved in the research being reviewed cannot participate in the review of that research. 

7. The Chairperson may request the submission of relevant materials from the principal researcher or person(s) responsible for submitting or reporting data. 

8. Committee members must maintain confidentiality regarding all matters related to the review.

 Article 7 (Functions of the Research Ethics Committee) 

The Committee shall review and make decisions on the following: 

1. Research ethics issues related to research papers. 

2. Allegations of research integrity violations. 

3. Investigations of research misconduct. 

4. Other matters related to research ethics.

 Article 8 (Raising Issues Related to Research Ethics and Preservation of Evidence) 

1. Issues related to research ethics can be reported orally, in writing, by email, or by any other means to the President, the Editor-in-Chief, or the Editorial Board members. Reports must be made with the reporter’s real name. 

2. Editorial Board members have an obligation to review allegations of research misconduct in relation to conference presentations and journal submissions, and if misconduct is identified, they must report it to the Committee after consulting with the Editor-in-Chief. 

3. Results of investigations into research misconduct must be reported to the Society, and records must be kept for 3 years after the case is closed. 

4. The Society has an obligation to protect whistleblowers from any disadvantages or harm, such as disciplinary action, differential treatment, or undue pressure, due to reporting misconduct. 

5. The identity of the whistleblower shall not be disclosed, and if the whistleblower suffers any disadvantage under Paragraph 4 or exposure against their will, the individuals and institutions related to the receiving of the report are responsible. 

6. Whistleblowers may request updates on the progress and schedule of investigations and the responsible institution or the Committee must respond honestly. 

7. Whistleblowers who knew or should have known that their reports were false are not protected.

 Article 9 (Procedures for Verifying Research Integrity) 

1. Verification procedures for misconduct include preliminary investigation, full investigation, and judgment. Preliminary and full investigations may proceed together in some cases. 

2. The Committee may add any necessary steps to the investigation process.

 Article 10 (Initiation of Research Integrity Verification) 

1. Research integrity verification procedures are initiated when a report of research misconduct related to research published in the Society’s journal is received, or when misconduct is recognized by the Editorial Board. 

2. Verification must be initiated within 30 days of receiving the report or recognizing misconduct, unless special circumstances exist.

 Article 11 (Research Items Subject to Integrity Verification) 

Research materials that are within 5 years from the date of the report will be subject to verification, and research misconduct occurring before that period will not be investigated regardless of a report. However, if the researcher directly cites the results from prior research in subsequent work within 5 years, the earlier misconduct may be reviewed.

 Article 12 (Preliminary Investigation) 

1. Preliminary investigations are conducted to determine whether further investigation is necessary, and must start within 30 days of receiving the report and conclude within 60 days of initiation. 

2. If the subject of the preliminary investigation admits to the misconduct, the case may be judged without proceeding to a full investigation. 

3. If the Committee decides not to conduct a full investigation, the detailed reasons will be communicated to the whistleblower within 10 days.

 Article 13 (Full Investigation) 

1. Full investigations aim to determine whether misconduct occurred, and must begin within 10 days of the preliminary investigation decision or any objection, and conclude within 90 days of initiation. 

2. The subject of the investigation must be given the opportunity to present their objections before the Committee finalizes the results. However, if they do not respond, it will be deemed that they do not have any objections. 

3. The results of the subject’s objections or responses must be included in the investigation report.

 Article 14 (Proof of Research Integrity) 

1. The responsibility to prove misconduct lies with the Society and the Committee, except when the subject intentionally destroys or refuses to submit requested materials, in which case the responsibility to prove the integrity of the materials lies with the subject. 

2. The Committee must ensure equal opportunities for the whistleblower and the subject to provide responses, objections, and counterarguments.

 Article 15 (Judgment on Research Integrity) 

1. Judgment refers to finalizing the results of the full investigation and notifying the whistleblower and subject in writing. 

2. All investigations should be completed within 6 months from the start of the preliminary investigation, although the Committee may extend the investigation if necessary. 

3. If significant flaws are found in the investigation or new misconduct is discovered, the whistleblower or subject may appeal within 30 days of receiving the results.

4. If the Committee determines that the contents of the appeal are reasonable and valid, it must conduct a direct reinvestigation of the disputed facts.

5. The Committee’s decision regarding the reinvestigation will have final effect, and no further requests for reconsideration under these regulations can be made.

 Article 16 (Handling of Investigation Results) 

1. The Committee must report the results of the preliminary and full investigations to the President within 10 days after completing each stage. 

2. The report must include the following: 

   1) Content of the report 

   2) Misconduct under investigation 

   3) List of the Committee members 

   4) Whether full investigation was conducted and the grounds for it 

   5) The role of the subject and whether misconduct occurred 

   6) Relevant evidence and witnesses 

   7) Objections or counter arguments from both parties and their resolution 

3. After consulting with the President, the Committee must notify the violator of the decision in writing. 

4. If a paper is found to violate research ethics, it must be retracted from the journal, and the violation must be publicly announced. If necessary, the violator’s superiors/supervisors will be notified.

5. A violator may be banned from submitting papers to the journal for 3 years after the judgment. 

6. The Committee may impose sanctions such as warnings, suspension, or expulsion from the Society or notify relevant organizations of the misconduct.

7. The person suspected of research misconduct has the right to raise objections to the Committee’s investigation results, and the Committee must ensure the opportunity for reexamination.

 Article 17 (Reexamination) 

1. The author of the paper found to be in violation of research ethics may request a reexamination within 30 days of receiving the decision. 

2. The Committee must conduct the reexamination under Article 5 within 7 days of receiving the request and notify the researcher of the results within 30 days.

 Article 18 (Affirmation of Compliance with Research Ethics and Copyright Transfer Agreement) 

1. Researchers participating in any research related to the Society must comply with these research ethics regulations and submit an affirmation of compliance. 

2. Researchers submitting papers to the journal must submit an “Affirmation of Compliance with Research Ethics and Copyright Transfer Agreement” to the Editorial Board.

 Supplementary Provisions 

Article 1 (Effective Date) 

These regulations shall take effect on January 1, 2025.