問題與研究

出版與寫作倫理

《問題與研究》季刊（Wenti Yu Yanjiu）的出版宗旨是探討國際關係、國際法、國際組織、外交政策、比較政治、區域研究、國際政治經濟以及其它國際發展等議題。《問題與研究》季刊不接受違反學術倫理行為的研究出版，包含：剽竊、一稿多投/重複投稿、杜撰/假造資料、沒有實際參與研究的掛名，與未揭露之利益衝突等。《問題與研究》季刊亦採用由 Elsevier B.V 建議之《出版倫理》規定（http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/authorsview.authors/rights）。內容包含作者、《問題與研究》季刊編者與審查委員之義務。

作者義務

作者對於原創論文著作應該準確陳述和客觀討論。研究數據應該準確呈現在文章中。研究論文必須包含參考資料與重要細節，以便他人得以重複研究。欺騙或故意不準確的陳述是違反學術倫理的行為。回顧論文與專業發表之文章必須精確且客觀。

作者需保留原始數據，於出版後供編輯評審，或大眾取得資料之用。

作者應確定整份報告為自己的作品，若有使用其他作者之論述，須明確引述。任何形式的剽竊等不道德行為是不被接受的，這包含：私自挪用他人結論為自己成果、複製或再闡釋其他作品而沒有引述來源，與仿冒他人作品為自己著作。

作者不應該在多個期刊或出版品同時發表本質上相同的研究論文，同時投稿同一份原稿至不同期刊被視為不符合出版倫理的行為。作者不能將之前已發表的研究投至本期刊、同時也不可以將投給本期刊之作品同時投給其它期刊。但在特定的情況下二次出版（secondary publication）可被允許，例如，翻譯，不過作者與各（第一與二次）期刊編輯者均需同意進行二次出版，且二次出版的資料與詮釋必須與原第一次出版論文相符，而第一次出版的參考文獻也必須列於第二次出版品內。如果作者考慮將已發表的文章轉載，或翻譯轉載，於其他期刊或專書時事先須經本期刊同意，並轉載出版時註明。

作者必須善盡引用他人著作的責任。作者應舉出影響研究本質的出版品。私下獲得之資訊，如對話、書信、第三方之討論等，若無資料來源明確同意，原則上不應使用或發表。透過審查他人文件而獲得之資訊，例如審閱他人稿件或申請案件，如無原著人明確的書面授權函，不應使用。

對於研究著作有構思、設計、執行或闡明等重要貢獻者才得以列為作者，所有對研究著作有實質貢獻者需列於共同作者。其他對研究有貢獻者應被確認或詳列清楚。通訊作者確保所有具有貢獻的共同作者都列名於論文中，且對論文沒有貢獻者不應列名於論文中。通訊作者需確認每位共同作者於投稿前，都完成檢視文稿，並同意該論文稿的投稿。

作者需公開任何可能被視為影響研究結果或結果詮釋的所有研究經費來源，或其他會有利益衝突的資料，包含資金補助、計畫補助、僱傭關係、顧問、股票擁有權、稿酬、專家證詞費用、專利申請/註冊、或其他研究贊助。未來可能的利益衝突之資料必須儘早提供。

當作者發現研究內容含有錯誤或不正確資訊，應迅速通知編者與編輯部，並採取撤回論文或改正等相關措施。若編者或編輯部透過第三方得知研究論文有重大錯誤，作者除了立即撤稿，或修改稿子，或向編者說明原稿的正確性。

編者義務

對完成「同儕評審（peer review）」之稿件，編輯者可依據研究議題本身，或對其他研究者或讀者們的重要性決定投稿文章是否出版。編者可依據期刊編輯委員政策，並受與版權與抄襲有關之法律原則的限制。編者可與其他編者或評審人討論以做出出版決定。

編者需依照論文內容進行評審，不得依據種族、性別、性傾向、宗教、族群、國籍與作者的政治信仰作為評審標準。

編者與編輯幕僚不得向相關個別作者、評審委員、編輯顧問與期刊發行者以外的人公開原稿之任何訊息。

未取得作者之同意，編者不得將提交原稿中未發表材料為自己研究所用。
同儕評審提供之訊息與構思必須保密，並不得挪為私人利益之用。
當編者認為與投稿作者、企業與組織構成競爭、合作或其它關聯等利益衝突時，必須迴避稿件審查，並請求編輯委員、副編輯或助理編輯代為處理。
編者需要求所有研究貢獻者公開相關利益衝突資訊。若利益衝突於出版後被揭露，需發表更正說明，或撤銷出版，或表達利害關係聲明等必要措施。
須確保贊助品（sponsored supplements）在同儕評審的過程中受到與期刊其他論文相同要求的審查。
贊助品項目須完全符合學術使用之價值，而非商業利益考量。

審查委員義務

審查委員若無法評審，必須通知編輯部，並主動要求撤銷審查委員資格。

審查委員審核稿件應謹守不得向編者以外之人透漏或討論審查的文章。

審查委員必須排除個人觀點，公正且客觀執行評審工作，並為自己的評審論述提供相關佐證。審查委員不應對於被審查文章的作者進行個人批評。

審查委員需識別出沒有被作者引註的出版品，他人著作之結論、衍生發現、或論點應該附在相關引註內。審查委員也必須提醒編者審查中的文章和其他已出版文章可能的重複性或相似性。

未取得作者之明確同意，審查委員不得將提交原稿中未發表材料為自己研究所用。同儕審查獲得之訊息或想法必須保密，並不得挪為私人利益之用。當審查委員認為與其他作者、企業與組織構成競爭、合作或其他關聯等利益衝突時，必須要求迴避審查委員資格。

著作權

文稿經審查接受後，作者應將文稿著作權轉讓給《問題與研究》季刊。稿件須按照本刊「撰稿體例」的格式撰寫。

Publication ethics and malpractice statement

(composed using the Publishing ethics resource kit and in compliance with Elsevier recommendations)

Ethical guidelines for journal publication

(These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies).

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Wenti Yu Yanjiu is to seek ways and means for theoretically interpreting international activities and development. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society. Institute of International Relations at National Chengchi University as publisher of Wenti Yu Yanjiu takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Duties of authors

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial “opinion” works should be clearly identified as such.

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, which this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. If reprinting or translating a published article to another journal or an edited volume is considered by the author, he or she should contact Wenti Yu Yanjiu and obtain permission from the editor. The secondary publication must cite the primary Wenti Yu Yanjiu publication.

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. In principle, information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Duties of the Editorial Board

The editors of Wenti Yu Yanjiu are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

The editors should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. The editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. The editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

The editors should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of reviewers

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Wenti Yu Yanjiu shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of reviewers

Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be asked to complete a transfer of the copyright of the article to Wenti Yu Yanjiu. Accepted manuscripts should be edited by authors in accordance with the format detailed in “Manuscript styling”.