Research and Publication Ethics
Enacted on January 2, 2026
The Journal of Design Practice in the Built Environment follows the ethical guidelines for research and publication outlined in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines) and the ICMJE Recommendations (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations). All procedures for addressing research and publication misconduct adhere to the COPE flowcharts (https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts). Any instances of duplicate publication or plagiarism will result in immediate rejection and may negatively impact the acceptance of future submissions.
1. Authorship
Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, and/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 published; and 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. Every author should meet all of these four conditions. After the initial submission of a manuscript, any changes whatsoever in authorship (adding author(s), deleting author(s), or re-arranging the order of authors) must be explained by a letter to the editor from the authors concerned. This letter must be signed by all authors of the paper. Copyright assignment must also be completed by every author.
Correction of authorship after publication: The editorial office does not correct authorship after publication unless a mistake has been made by the editorial staff. Authorship may be changed before publication but after submission when an authorship correction is requested by all of the authors involved with the manuscript.
2. Originality, plagiarism and duplicate publication
Submitted manuscripts must not have been previously published or be under consideration for publication elsewhere. No part of the accepted manuscript should be duplicated in any other scientific journal without the permission of the Editorial Board. Submitted manuscripts are screened for possible plagiarism or duplicate publication by Similarity Check upon arrival (https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/). If plagiarism or duplicate publication is detected, the manuscripts may be rejected, the authors will be announced in the journal, and their institutions will be informed. There will also be penalties for the authors.
Authors must obtain the necessary permission to reuse third-party material in your article. The use of short extracts of text and some other types of material is usually permitted, on a limited basis, for the purposes of criticism and review without securing formal permission. If you wish to include any material in your paper for which you do not hold copyright, and which is not covered by this informal agreement, you will need to obtain written permission from the copyright owner prior to submission. More information on requesting permission to reproduce works under copyright.
3. Secondary publication
It is possible to republish manuscripts if the manuscripts satisfy the conditions of secondary publication of the ICMJE Recommendations (https://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf).
4. Conflict of interest statement
The corresponding author must inform the editor of any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the authors’ interpretation of the data. Examples of potential conflicts of interest are financial support from or connections to companies, political pressure from interest groups, and academically related issues.
5. Statement of human and animal right
Clinical research should be done in accordance of the Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, outlined in the Helsinki Declaration, available from: (https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/). Clinical studies that do not meet the Helsinki Declaration will not be considered for publication. Human subjects should not be identifiable, such that patients’ names, initials, hospital numbers, dates of birth, or other protected healthcare information should not be disclosed. For animal subjects, research should be performed based on the National or Institutional Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, and the ethical treatment of all experimental animals should be maintained.
6. Statement of informed consent and institutional review board approval
Copies of written informed consent documents should be kept for studies on human subjects, which includes identifiable information or sensitive information. For clinical studies of human subjects, a certificate, agreement, or approval by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the author’s institution is required. If necessary, the editor or reviewers may request copies of these documents to resolve questions about IRB approval and study conduct.
7. Process for managing research and publication misconduct
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). The discussion and decision on the suspected cases are carried out by the Editorial Board.
8. Process for handling cases requiring corrections, retractions, and editorial expressions of concern
Cases that require editorial expressions of concern or retraction shall follow the COPE flowcharts available from: (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts). If correction needs, it will follow the ICMJE Recommendation for Corrections, Retractions, Republications and Version Control available from: (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/corrections-and-version-control.html) as follows: Honest errors are a part of science and publishing and require publication of a correction when they are detected. Corrections are needed for errors of fact. Minimum standards are as follows: First, it shall publish a correction notice as soon as possible detailing changes from and citing the original publication on both an electronic and numbered print page that is included in an electronic or a print Table of Contents to ensure proper indexing; Second, it shall post a new article version with details of the changes from the original version and the date(s) on which the changes were made through CrossMark; Third, it shall archive all prior versions of the article. This archive can be either directly accessible to readers; and Fourth, previous electronic versions shall prominently note that there are more recent versions of the article via CrossMark.
9. How the journal handle complaints and appeals
The policy of the journal 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 the email address (landkibe@naver.com). 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, https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).
10. Editorial responsibilities
The Editorial Board will continuously work to monitor and safeguard publication ethics: guidelines for retracting articles; maintenance of the integrity of the academic record; preclusion of business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards; publishing corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed; and excluding plagiarism and fraudulent data. The editors maintain the following responsibilities: responsibility and authority to reject and accept articles; avoiding any conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject or accept; promoting publication of corrections or retractions when errors are found; and preservation of the anonymity of reviewers.
11. Use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies
The following principles shall apply to the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of manuscripts and materials for publication. Where authors use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, such technologies should be used only in a limited manner to improve the readability, language, and clarity of the manuscript. Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies must not be used to replace scholarly judgment, draw scientific conclusions, or generate the core ideas of the research. The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies must always be subject to human oversight and control, and authors must carefully review the output generated by such technologies and make any necessary revisions. Authors bear full responsibility and accountability for the entire content of the manuscript.
If authors use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of a manuscript, they must explicitly disclose such use within the manuscript. Such disclosure helps promote transparency and trust among authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and other stakeholders, and also facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant tool or technology.
Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies must not be listed as an author or co-author, nor cited as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and roles that can be attributed only to humans. Each author is responsible for appropriately examining and resolving questions related to the accuracy and integrity of the manuscript, and must be able to approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission. Authors are also responsible for ensuring the originality of the manuscript, confirming that all listed authors meet the criteria for authorship, and ensuring that the manuscript does not infringe upon any third-party rights. Authors should familiarize themselves with this journal’s research and publication ethics policies prior to submission.
12. Research Ethics council and role of the council
To address research ethics and related issues, a Research Ethics Council (the Council) is convened by the Editor-in-Chief when necessary. The Editor-in-Chief serves as the chair of the Council, or may designate another person to act as the chair. The composition of the Council members is determined by the chair. The Council operates until the issue under review is fully resolved. The roles of the Research Ethics Council are as follows:
1) The Council reviews research ethics issues arising from the publication of the Journal and related papers (original articles, review articles, and others).
2) The Council investigates allegations of forgery, alteration, plagiarism, wrongful authorship indication, or multiple/duplicate publication for published papers and reports the findings to the Executive Committee.
13. Administration of research ethics violation
1) When research ethics violations occur, the Chair of the Council must convene a meeting immediately to review the situation and report the findings to the Editorial Board.
2) The council must keep any investigation of ethics violations confidential and ensure that the investigation does not conflict with the interests of the Journal.
3) Upon completing the investigation, the Council will decide on the appropriate level of punishment for the violator (author or corresponding author) based on the severity of the violation. The Council may prohibit the violator from publishing in the Journal for a specified period or exclude them permanently.
4) The Council will keep a record of the investigation and the results of any ethical misconduct.
5) If the Council confirms ethical misconduct in a paper, the Executive Committee will announce the case and disapprove the publication of the paper in the Journal. If the paper has already been published, it will be removed from the Journal’s list of papers, and this action will be announced to the Journal's members and related academic institutions.
14. Regulations for Preventing Research Misconduct Involving Related-Party Co-authors
A related-party co-author refers to a case in which a researcher involves a minor (under the age of 19) or a family member (such as a spouse, child, or relative within the fourth degree of kinship) in research or jointly authors a paper with them. In such cases, the following procedures shall be followed to prevent research misconduct:
1) Prior to submitting a manuscript, the researcher must notify the editorial board in advance of the involvement of a related party, and must comply with general research ethics guidelines regarding joint research and co-authorship with related parties.
2) When submitting a manuscript that includes a related-party co-author, the corresponding author must submit prior written consent for the provision of the related party’s personal information to the editorial board.
3) If research misconduct involving a related party is confirmed, a Research Ethics Committee shall be convened to proceed with disciplinary measures. Additionally, if the related-party co-author has gained any benefit from the paper (e.g., admission or advancement in school, affiliation with a research institution), the institution concerned shall be officially notified of the misconduct.
