Korean Society of Remote Sensing (KSRS) is a professional academic organization of experts in the field of remote sensing that aims to contribute to the promotion of science and technology in Korea by contributing to the development and dissemination of science and technology related to remote sensing and its applications.

True academic development in the field of remote sensing can only be achieved if the results of valuable academic research by experts in remote sensing are fairly judged and their value is mutually recognized, and all experts in remote sensing can share the contents together. Therefore, the project of regularly publishing and distributing a professional journal that selects and publishes research articles containing the results of academic research in the field of remote sensing according to strict standards is the most important for achieving the purpose of establishing KSRS.

In order to contribute to developing the field of remote sensing in Korea through the publication of higher-quality journals, it is necessary to establish ethical guidelines for authors and reviewers of research articles, as well as the editorial board members of journals. By clearly stating the ethical standards to be observed as a professional in the field of remote sensing, it will be possible to fulfill the professional responsibilities of remote sensing personnel to the field of remote sensing and society as a whole more faithfully.

A. Ethical Obligations of Editorial Board Members

• The editorial board member should treat articles submitted for publication in the journal equitably based on the quality of the article and the rules of submission, irrespective of gender, age, institutional affiliation, or personal relationship with the author.
• The editorial board member should take appropriate action on submitted articles without delay.
• The editorial board member is solely responsible for deciding whether to publish a submitted article.
• The editorial board member may seek advice on the quality and accuracy of an article from a third party with specialized knowledge and impartial judgment in the field of the relevant academic major.
• The editorial board member should never disclose the contents of a submitted article to anyone other than the reviewers until a decision has been made to publish the article.
• The editorial board member should respect the character and academic independence of authors.

B. Ethical Obligations of Authors

• The author should objectively and accurately describe the contents and significance of the research and should not arbitrarily exclude or add the results of the research unless there is a statistical reason to do so. The author should make every effort to ensure that the same information has not already been published.
• A research article should contain a conclusion that is of sufficient academic merit and a comprehensive set of arguments to support it. If submitting a research article that argues for the same conclusion as a previously published article, new arguments must have significant academic merit. Breaking up a research report into multiple articles will ultimately devalue the research article and should be avoided whenever possible.
• Research articles should contain detailed descriptions that are sufficiently detailed to allow experienced experts in remote sensing to repeatedly perform the contents of the study; however, the publication of journals is quite expensive, and efforts should be made to avoid wasting journal space.
• When citing academic material that has been made public, one should strive to describe it accurately, and if the material is not part of common knowledge, one should clearly identify the source. In the case of information obtained through the review of articles or research plans, or through personal contact, one can only cite it with the explicit consent of the researcher who provided the information.
• Authors should include in the bibliography any significant published literature that had a significant impact on the direction of the study or that can help the reader understand the content of the study, except for common sense. It is also advisable to cite articles that contradict one’s own findings or opinions.
• Dually submitting an article that has been published in a journal as a research article or that contains content from an article that has been submitted and is under review is not acceptable.
• It is acceptable to explicitly state in a research article that one is critical of another researcher's results, but personal criticism is never allowed.
• All researchers who have made a scientifically significant contribution to the research being reported and who will share responsibility and credit for the results should be co-authors. In the case of an article based in whole or in part on a thesis, it is recommended that the student submitting the thesis and his or her advisor be co-authors unless the article is a review. A person who has not made scholarly contributions to the research results should not be included as co-authors while a person who has provided support outside academic aspects, such as administrative support for the study, should preferably be indicated in the “footnote” or “acknowledgments.” The author of the article should obtain explicit consent from all co-authors to participate as co-author. The order in which co-authors are listed should, in principle, be determined by consulting with them, and preferably the researcher who has made the most significant contribution should be listed first.
• Authors submitting articles must confirm that no contractual or ownership issues exist that could be affected by the publication of the article.
• Authors should make every effort to accept favorably the opinions of the editor board members and reviewers expressed during the review process and incorporate them into the manuscript, and if disagree with their views, they should inform the editorial board members in detail of the basis and reasons.
• Oral presentations or posters at conferences held by KSRS must not have been presented at any other conference of national or greater size; however, if the conference proceedings are published in a periodical journal, they must not have been published in KSRS.

C. Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

• All experts in remote sensing are obligated to contribute to academic advancement by diligently reviewing articles requested by the editorial board member of the journal within the time period specified in the review regulations.
• Reviewers should objectively evaluate the contents of the experiments and theories, interpretation of results, and quality of the explanations contained in the article while maintaining high scientific and scholarly standards as appropriate. Reviewers should not base their review on their own personal beliefs or assumptions that had not been perfectly verified and should make every effort to be impartial, regardless of their own research or personal relationships with the authors.
• Reviewers should respect the personality and independence of the authors as experts in their field. In their review comments to the editorial board member, they should explain in detail their judgment of the article and the areas in which they believe it needs to be improved, along with the reasons. Review comments should be written in a favorable and gentle manner and should never use offensive language about the authors. It is not advisable to request additional material or clarification from the authors for their own personal purposes.
• The reviewer should ensure the confidentiality of the article requested for review. It is not appropriate to show the article to others or to discuss its contents with others unless seeking specific advice about the article. If writing a review with the advice of others, the reviewer must inform the Editor-in-Chief of this fact. It is not appropriate to quote from the article without the author's consent before it is published in the journal in which it is featured.
• Reviewers should pay close attention to the accurate citation of important research relevant to the content of the article. If the content of the article they are reviewing is very similar to another article already published in the journal, they should inform the Editor-in-Chief in detail.
• The reviewer should complete the review as soon as possible and send the review comments to the Editor-in-Chief. If the reviewer believes that he or she is not qualified to review the content of the article, he or she should notify the editorial board member who requested the review without delay.