Research Misconduct Handling

Research Misconduct Handling

1. Policy Statement

The journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity and publication ethics. All manuscripts submitted to and articles published in this journal must comply with the principles of honesty, transparency, accountability, and ethical conduct in research and scholarly publishing.

The journal takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously and handles them fairly, objectively, confidentially, and in accordance with established publication ethics principles. The journal refers to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when addressing suspected research misconduct.

2. Types of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to, the following:

Plagiarism: Using another person's words, ideas, data, or work without appropriate acknowledgment or citation.

Data Fabrication: Inventing research data, results, or findings that were never obtained.

Data Falsification: Manipulating research materials, processes, data, images, or results in a way that misrepresents the research findings.

Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Publishing or submitting substantially similar work to multiple journals without appropriate disclosure or justification.

Authorship Misconduct: Inappropriately assigning, omitting, or misrepresenting authorship, including listing individuals who have not made a qualifying contribution.

Citation Manipulation: Inappropriately adding citations to manipulate citation metrics or influence journal rankings.

Research Ethics Violations: Conducting research involving human participants without required ethical approval or informed consent, where applicable.

Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Failing to disclose relevant financial, professional, or personal interests that could influence the research or its interpretation.

Image or Figure Manipulation: Inappropriately altering, duplicating, or presenting images or figures in a misleading manner.

Peer Review Misconduct: Manipulating the peer-review process, including impersonation, fabricated reviewer identities, or inappropriate interference with reviewer assessments.

3. Reporting Suspected Research Misconduct

Editors, reviewers, authors, readers, and other interested parties may report suspected research misconduct involving manuscripts submitted to or articles published in the journal.

Reports should be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief or the editorial office and should include a clear description of the concern and any available supporting evidence, such as relevant publications, data, documents, or correspondence.

Reports will be handled confidentially to the extent possible. The journal will not treat an allegation as proof of misconduct without an appropriate assessment of the available evidence.

4. Procedures for Handling Research Misconduct

Upon receiving an allegation or identifying a potential case of research misconduct, the journal will follow these procedures:

4.1. Preliminary Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor will assess the allegation to determine whether it is sufficiently credible and relevant to warrant further investigation. The assessment may include plagiarism screening, comparison of publications, examination of figures or data, and verification of research ethics documentation.

4.2. Communication with the Author(s)

Where appropriate, the corresponding author will be contacted and invited to provide an explanation and relevant supporting documents within a reasonable period. The author(s) will be given a fair opportunity to respond to the concerns.

4.3. Further Investigation

If the preliminary assessment identifies reasonable grounds for concern, the journal may conduct a more detailed review, consult independent experts, request original research data, or contact the author's affiliated institution or relevant research ethics committee.

The scope of the investigation will depend on the nature and seriousness of the allegation. The journal will distinguish between honest errors, questionable research practices, and deliberate misconduct.

4.4. Editorial Decision

After reviewing the available evidence and responses, the editorial team will determine the appropriate action. Decisions will be based on the evidence, the seriousness of the concern, the impact on the reliability of the research, and applicable publication ethics principles.

4.5. Documentation

The journal will maintain appropriate records of the allegation, supporting evidence, communications, investigation, and final decision. Records will be handled confidentially and retained in accordance with applicable policies and requirements.

5. Possible Actions and Sanctions

Depending on the findings and severity of the case, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

Request clarification, additional documentation, or correction of the manuscript.

Require revision of the manuscript to address identified concerns.

Reject the manuscript before publication.

Publish a correction if the published article contains errors that can be appropriately corrected.

Publish an expression of concern when significant doubts remain about the reliability or integrity of a published article and further investigation is pending.

Retract a published article when the evidence and circumstances justify retraction.

Notify the author's affiliated institution, research ethics committee, funding body, or other relevant authority when appropriate.

Apply additional editorial measures in accordance with the journal's policies and applicable ethical standards.

The journal will select actions proportionate to the findings and will not impose sanctions solely on the basis of an unsubstantiated allegation.

6. Post-Publication Misconduct

If suspected research misconduct concerns an already published article, the journal will assess whether the issue affects the validity, reliability, or ethical acceptability of the published work.

Depending on the findings, the journal may publish a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction notice. Any post-publication notice will clearly identify the affected article and explain the reason for the editorial action to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

Where necessary, the journal may contact the author's institution or other relevant authorities for further assessment.

7. Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision related to an allegation of research misconduct by submitting a written request with a clear explanation and relevant supporting evidence.

Appeals will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or, where feasible, an independent editor who was not directly involved in the original decision. The journal will communicate the outcome of the appeal to the concerned author(s).

8. Confidentiality and Protection of Parties

The journal will protect the confidentiality of allegations, evidence, and communications to the extent possible, subject to applicable legal, ethical, and institutional requirements.

All parties involved will be treated fairly and respectfully. The journal will seek to protect individuals who raise concerns in good faith from inappropriate retaliation, while also protecting the rights and reputation of individuals who are the subject of allegations.

Confidential information will be shared only when necessary for a fair assessment, investigation, or appropriate reporting.

9. Commitment to Publication Ethics

The journal is committed to upholding research integrity, promoting responsible research practices, and maintaining public trust in scholarly publishing. All cases of suspected research misconduct will be handled according to the principles of fairness, impartiality, transparency, confidentiality, and accountability.

For further guidance, the journal refers to the recommendations and resources provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Reference: Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). https://publicationethics.org/guidance