Researchers should be honest about their research. Researchers need to have a high ethical standard at all times during the research, in areas such as receiving funds for research, publishing research results, and fairly compensating participants. More specifically, research papers that are forged, altered, plagiarized, overlapped, and/or dishonest cannot be published either online or in a printed form and are not eligible for research funds.

• (1) Forgery, Alteration, and Plagiarism

  1) Forgery: making up data or research results that do not exist.
  2) Alteration: fabricating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing/deleting research results intentionally to distort research contents or results.
  3) Plagiarism: using others’ ideas, research (process and contents), and/or results without proper authorization or citation.

• (2) Overapping Publication and Dishonest Research

  1) Publishing a paper that overlaps substantially with one published in other journals or public domain is prohibited.
  2) Multiple or duplicate publication can be allowed after a review from the Publication Council, if it is qualified under the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly work in Medical Journals (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations).
  3) The following is considered dishonest: either refusing to an authorship (without proper reasons) to a person who contributed, or giving credit to a person who did not contribute to publication.

Studies involving human subjects and/or parts of human tissues should follow the Declaration of Helsinki (http://www.wma.net).
Details are as follows:

• (1) Researchers should fully explain the purpose and methods of research as well as any possible mental and physical harm that could occur during research participation. If they plan to publish the research results, these issues should be specified in the manuscript.
• (2) Researchers cannot write down participants’ names or initials. In case of possible disclosure of participants’ identification through pictures of face or anything similar, researchers should receive written informed consent from the participants or their guardians.
• (3) Researchers should receive an approval from Institutional Review Board and indicate it on the paper if they would like to publish the research results.
• (4) Any research that deals with clinical trial should be registered to the primary national clinical trial registration site such as https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/index.jsp, or other sites accredited by WHO or International Committee of Medical Journal Editor (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishingand-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html).

Studies using animals should follow general rules:

• (1) Researchers should indicate what they did to minimize the pain or discomfort that experiment subjects went through.
• (2) Researchers should indicate that they did not violate NIH guideline (NIH Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals).
• (3) When necessary, the journal can ask for a written consent and an approval letter issued by Animal Ethics Committee.

Ensure correct use of the terms sex (when reporting biological factors) and gender (identity, psychosocial or cultural factors), and, unless inappropriate, report the sex and/or gender of study participants, the sex of animals or cells, and describe the methods used to determine sex and gender. If the study was done involving an exclusive population, for example in only one sex, authors should justify why, except in obvious cases (e.g., prostate cancer).” Authors should define how they determined race or ethnicity and justify their relevance.

Conflicts of interest or financial support should be indicated in the manuscript.

Process for Managing Research and Publication Misconduct Journal of Cancer Prevention is part of Similarity Check, an initiative to help editors verify the originality of submitted manuscripts. Submitted manuscripts are scanned and compared with the Similarity Check database and iThenticate system (http://www.ithenticate.com). When the journal faces suspected cases of research and publication misconduct, such as redundant (duplicate) publication, plagiarism, fraudulent or fabricated data, changes in authorship, an undisclosed conflict of interest, ethical problems with a submitted manuscript, a reviewer who has appropriated an author’s idea or data, complaints against editors, and so on, the resolution process will follow the flowchart provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts).

How the Journal Handle Complaints and Appeals
The policy of Journal of Cancer Prevention is primarily aimed at protecting the authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher of the journal. If not described below, the process of handling complaints and appeals follows the guidelines of the Committee of Publication Ethics available from: https://publicationethics.org/appeals. Who complains or makes an appeal? Submitters, authors, reviewers, and readers may register complaints and appeals in a variety of cases as follows: falsification, fabrication, plagiarism, duplicate publication, authorship dispute, conflict of interest, ethical treatment of animals, informed consent, bias or unfair/ inappropriate competitive acts, copyright, stolen data, defamation, and legal problem. If any individuals or institutions want to inform the cases, they can send a letter via E-mail: journal@jcpjournal.org. For the complaints or appeals, concrete data with answers to all factual questions (who, when, where, what, how, why) should be provided.

Who is responsible to resolve and handle complaints and appeals? The Editor, Editorial Board, or Editorial Office is responsible for them. A legal consultant or ethics editor may be able to help with the decision making. What may be the consequence of remedy? It depends on the type or degree of misconduct. The consequence of resolution will follow the guidelines of the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).

Corrections of Errors
The journal will publish corrections when errors could affect the interpretation of data or information. When the error is made by the author, the term “Corrigendum” will be used; when the error is made by the Publisher, the term “Erratum” will be used.

All authors must have made significant intellectual contributions to all of the following: (1) the conception and design of the study, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, (2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content, (3) final approval of the version to be submitted, (4) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the content. Participation solely in the acquisition of funds or the collection of data does not justify authorship. General supervision of the research group is not sufficient for authorship.

Prevention of research misconduct by co-author(s) with personal connections
Those under 19-year-old or family members (spouse, children, and relatives as far as fourth cousins) are called “people with personal connections.”

• 1) A paper involving co-author(s) with personal connections should demonstrate their(his/her) contribution to the research and the manuscript.
• 2) A paper including co-author(s) with personal connections should be submitted with “Disclosure Form for Author(s) with Personal Connections” or “Pre-release Publication Form for Author(s) with Personal Connections.”