본문 바로가기

기관정보

기관정보 기관정보상세

기관상세정보

학회일반현황
학회일반현황
학회명 국문 한국스포츠심리학회 기관구분 학회
영문 Korean Society Of Sport Psychology 제재이력 변경이력
전화번호   팩스번호  
홈페이지 http://kssp.jams.or.kr 이메일  
주소 [03722] 서울특별시 서대문구 연세로 50, 스포츠과학관 212호 (신촌동)
대표자 성명 육동원
소속 연세대학교 직위 교수
임기 2018-03-01 ~ 2021-02-28
실무자 성명 우성원 연락처(핸드폰)
기업단체구분
연구분야 체육
행정인력수 5명 전임연구인력수 5명
설립구분 사단법인 설립일자 1989-04-29
설립목적
											The Korean Society of Sport Psychology (KSSP) is an organization devoted to promoting research, practice, and development in the discipline of sport and exercise psychology. The primary missions of the KSSP is to encourage and promote the study of human behaviour within sport, motor behavior, physical activity, and health settings, and to facilitate the sharing of knowledge through a newsletter, educational courses, and
conferences.
										
연구윤리제정일 2007-10-01 원문서비스url www.kssp21.or.kr
연구윤리내용
										Research ethics guidelines of the Korean Society of Sport Psychology
Effective: October 1, 2007 (Regulation No. 001)
Chapter 1. General guidelines
 
Article 1. Purpose
The purpose of these guidelines is to ensure that research ethics requirements of the Korean Society of Sport Psychology are met, and to define the processes involved in fair and systematic investigation in the event of a misconduct.  
 
Article 2.  Applicability
The guidelines apply to all members who are directly and indirectly associated with the contents of research submitted to or published in the journal.
 
Article 3.  Scope of application
The guidelines apply to all pertinent research to ensure ethics requirements are met and to verify its truthfulness, except in special circumstances.  
 
Article 4.  Definition of terminology
Research misconduct refers to forgery, alteration, plagiarism, and unfair identification of authorship committed during planning, conducting, and reporting and presenting of the research results, which are detailed as follows. 
1.	“Forgery” refers to the act of fording or producing information, data, and research results that do not exist. 
2.	“Alteration” refers to the action of altering the contents or results of research by artificially manipulating research materials, equipment, and processes, or altering or deleting data at will.  
3.	“Plagiarism” refers to the act of stealing someone else’s intellectual products, such as ideas, patents, and research contents and results without legitimate permission or citation.  
4.	“Unfair identification of authorship” refers to failure to identify an individual who, scientifically and technically, contributed to the research as an author, without a legitimate reason. Similarly, unfair attribution of authorship to an individual who did not contribute to the research constitutes this category.  
5.	“Coercing dishonest act” refers to the act of proposing to or coercing an individual to do the dishonest act described above.  
6.	“Interference with investigation” refers to the act of intentionally interfering with the investigation process pertaining to allegations of misconduct involving self and/or others, or harming of the informant.  
7.	“Others” refers to all other misconducts which seriously deviate from the generally accepted rules of conduct.  

Chapter 2 Organization and operation of the research ethics committee
Article 5.  Organization
The research ethics committee of the Korean Society of Sport Psychology (hereafter referred to as the Committee) is organized as follows.  
1.	The Committee is composed of a maximum of nine members, including the Committee chair appointed by the chair of the society.  
2.	The Committee is composed of the chair, vice-chair, secretary, and others, and the editing director of the Society becomes an ex officio member.  
3.	Members are appointed by the Committee chair for a two-year term, and the members may serve consecutive terms.  
 
Article 6.  Meetings
The Committee shall hold meetings, the details of which are as follows.
1.	The Committee chair convenes a meeting and assumes the chair’s role.  
2.	Resolution is made by majority attendance and the agreement of at least two-thirds of the members present.  
3.	Meetings are kept confidential in principle.  
4.	If the Committee requires, individuals of concern may be summoned to the meeting to present his/her opinion to the Committee members.  
5.	For the manuscript under investigation, the Committee members cannot participate in deliberation that is related to the manuscript.  
6.	If deemed necessary for the review, the Committee chair may ask the principal investigator to submit additional supporting materials.
7.	The Committee may invite two to three consultants in specific areas for consultations of submitted manuscripts and other matters.  
8.	Committee members should comply with the confidentiality agreement on all matters pertaining to manuscript review.

Article 7.  Functions
The Committee shall review the items described below and a make decision for each.  
1.	Matters pertaining to establishment and operation of guidelines pertaining to research ethics.  
2.	Ethical validity of submitted manuscript (fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism).  
3.	Research approval status and its scope (laboratory safety rules, bioethics regulations).  
4.	Fair identification of authors and acknowledgement.  
5.	Consent requirements – appropriate consent forms were obtained from study subjects (research participants).  
6.	Matters pertaining to study subjects’ safety, confidentiality, and damage compensation (research participants).  
7.	Matters pertaining to reporting and registration of fraudulent acts
8.	Matters pertaining to investigation of reported fraudulent acts and approval of investigation results.  
9.	Matters pertaining to protection of informant and exaltation of the individual investigated.  
10.	Other items submitted by the Committee chair for consideration.  

Chapter 3 Research ethics regulations of the journal
Section 1 Research ethics - authors
Article 8 Prohibition of plagiarism
Authors submitting a manuscript to the Korean Journal of Sport Psychology shall not present portions of research that was not carried out by himself/herself as if it is his/her own.  Authors must clearly identify the sources of quoted research results, and may refer to the sources multiple times. However, plagiarism is committed if a portion of the research results is used without due credit. 
  
Article 9 Identification of author(s)
The author or the order of authorship should be correctly identified according to the degree of contribution regardless of the individuals’ relative positions.  Gratuitous authorship or unfair identification as the primary author because of one’s position is not justified.  Similarly, failure to identify an author who contributed to the research is not justified. To identify an individual as a co-author, all the other co-authors’ approval must be obtained. A small contribution to the research may be identified in the acknowledgement section.  
  
Article 10 Prohibition of duplicate publication
Authors shall not publish or attempt to publish his/her research which has been previously published (including research scheduled to be published or under review) domestically or internationally, as if it is a new research.  
  
Article 11Citations and references
If a published article is quoted, it should be cited appropriately. As long as the information belongs outside of the realm of common sense, sources must be clearly cited.  In case material is obtained during a manuscript review or through a personal contact, it can be cited only after obtaining consent from the researcher who provided the information. When referencing somebody else’s writing or ideas, citation must be provided in footnotes. Such clear citations inform readers which part is the result of a previous research and which part is the author’s original thought, assertion, or interpretation.  

Article 12 Revision and supplementation
The author shall accept the reviewer(s)’ opinions suggested during the manuscript review process and reflect them in the manuscript. In case the author does not agree with the reviewers’ opinions, he/she may submit a written appeal to the reviewers, including grounds and reasons of disagreement, via the editor-in-chief.  


Section 2 Research ethics - editorial board members
  
Article 13 Request for a review 
The editor (chief editor) shall request a review of submitted manuscript to two reviewers with field expertise and fair assessment capacity.  The request is made so that the assessment is as objective as possible.  In case there is a discrepancy of more than two rating levels between the reviewers, however, a request may be made to a third reviewer in the field.  
  
Article 14 Fair management
Upon summarizing the reviewers’ evaluation, the chief editor shall have the responsibility to make the final decision regarding publication of the submitted manuscript.  The editorial members shall treat the submitted manuscript fairly based only on the quality of the manuscript and submission guidelines, regardless of the author’s gender, age, affiliation as well as any prejudice or personal relationship.  
  
Article 15Confidentiality regarding authors and contents of the manuscript
The chief editor shall not disclose information pertaining to authors or manuscript contents to anybody other than the reviewers until final publication decision is made.  
  
Section 3 Research ethics - reviewers
  
Article 16 Notification of review result
Upon honest evaluation of manuscripts, the reviewer shall notify the chief editor of the review results.  If the reviewer feels that he/she is not qualified to evaluate the manuscript fairly, he/she shall notify the chief editor.  The reviewers shall assess the submitted manuscripts and determine the following..
	①Publishable, ②Publishable after revision, ③Re-review after major revisions, ④ Unpublishable
  
Article 17 Review period
The reviewer shall strictly comply with the review deadline set by the review guidelines. If an effective review cannot be completed by the deadline due to exceptional circumstances, the reviewer shall notify the chief editor immediately.  The reviewer should keep in mind that a delayed review may cause damage to the author.  

Article 18 Duplicate publication, plagiarism, suitability
The reviewer shall begin the review by checking to see if whole or part of the manuscript is already published in the Society’s journal or other scholarly journal (duplicate publication, partial publication).  The reviewer must also verify that the content of the manuscript is consistent with the nature of the Korean Journal of Sport Psychology.  
  
Article 19 Fair review
The reviewer shall evaluate the manuscript based on objective criteria independent from one’s own academic beliefs or personal relationship with the author.  The reviewer shall not judge the manuscript unpublishable without clear and sufficient explanation, give unfavourable evaluation because the manuscript contradicts the reviewer’s point of view or interpretation, or evaluate without reading the manuscript thoroughly.  
  
Article 20 Completion of evaluation form
The reviewer shall clearly state his/her evaluation of the manuscript .If the reviewer believes that supplementation is needed in some parts, the reasons should also be provided in detail.  If the reviewer determined the manuscript to be unpublishable or to be requiring major revisions, detailed and sufficient reasons for such evaluations should be provided as well.  Reviewers shall adopt polite and gentle expressions as much as possible and shall not use expressions which are belittling and insulting to the author.  
  
Article 21 Protection of manuscript content
The reviewer shall keep confidentiality regarding the manuscript being reviewed.  Unless to specifically seek others’ consultation in the course of manuscript evaluation, the reviewer shall not disclose the manuscript, nor shall he/she discuss the content of the manuscript with others.  In addition, the content of the manuscript shall not be cited without consent of the author before the manuscript’s publication in the journal.  The submitted manuscript shall be protected so that the unpublished manuscript shall not be pirated in any circumstances.  

Section 4.  Research ethics - research misconduct
  
Article 22 Definition of misconduct
 Research misconduct refers to forgery, alteration, plagiarism, and unfair identification of authorship committed during planning, conducting, and reporting and presenting of the research results, which are detailed as follows. 
1.“Forgery” refers to the act of fording or producing information, data, and research results that do not exist. 
2.“Alteration” refers to the action of altering the contents or results of research by artificially manipulating research materials, equipment, and processes, or altering or deleting data at will.  
3.“Plagiarism”refers to the act of stealing someone else’s intellectual products, such as ideas, patents, and research contents and results without legitimate permission or citation.  
4.“Unfair identification of authorship” refers to failure to identify an individual who, scientifically and technically, contributed to the research as an author, without a legitimate reason. Similarly, unfair attribution of authorship to an individual who did not contribute to the research constitutes this category.  
5. “Interference with investigation” refers to the act of intentionally interfering with the investigation process pertaining to the allegations of misconduct involving self and/or others, or harming of the informant.  
  
Article 23 Organization, department, or officer who is in charge of registration of misconduct reports and the investigation
  
1.	Report of misconduct shall accompany the reporter's name, and it will be assigned to the committee through the publication director.
2.	For the reported misconduct, an investigation committee is organized under the responsibility of the ethics chair.  
3.	The investigation committee shall complete the investigation through a set procedures within the designated time period and report the results to the publication director.  
  
Article 24  Organization principle of  misconduct investigation committee, investigation procedure, and period
1.	The investigation committee refers to the ethics committee defined by the Society.  
2.	Misconduct investigation must be completed within 60 days of registering the report.  
3.	Misconduct investigation consists of the three stages of pre-investigation, investigation, and determination.  
  
The pre-investigation stage determines whether an investigation is necessary for the alleged misconduct. It is conducted within 20 days of registering the report, under the responsibility of the publication director.  
-	At the conclusion of the pre-investigation, if the individual being investigated admits all the allegations of misconduct, a determination can be made without progressing into the investigation stage. However, if it is determined that there is a potential for significant damage to the evidence, action can be taken to preserve the evidence.  
-	If it is determined that an investigation is not necessary at the pre-investigation stage, detailed reasons for such a decision shall be provided to the reporter, in writing, within 10 days of the decision.  
-	If the reporter does not agree with the results of the pre-investigation, he/she may appeal to the institution supporting the research within 10 days of receiving the notification.  

										
연구윤리파일 Research ethics guidelines of the Korean Society of Sport Psychology.docx   다운로드 

LoadingLoading....