Allegations of Research Misconduct

Journal of Science and Science Education (JoSSEd), published by the Postgraduate Program, University of Mataram, Indonesia, is committed to upholding the highest standards of research integrity, ethical conduct, transparency, and accountability throughout the scholarly publication process.

The journal takes all credible allegations of research misconduct seriously, whether they concern manuscripts under editorial consideration or articles that have already been published. Allegations will be evaluated objectively, fairly, confidentially, and in accordance with the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

JoSSEd does not tolerate research misconduct, including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research practices, manipulation of the publication process, or deliberate misrepresentation of research findings.

1. Definition of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct refers to serious violations of accepted ethical and professional standards in the design, conduct, reporting, review, or publication of scholarly research.

Research misconduct may include fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and other practices that compromise the reliability, originality, transparency, or integrity of scientific work.

An allegation does not constitute proof of misconduct. All concerns must be assessed based on available evidence, and individuals involved must be treated fairly throughout the evaluation process.

2. Types of Research Misconduct

JoSSEd recognizes the following forms of research and publication misconduct:

2.1 Data Fabrication

Inventing research data, observations, experimental results, participant responses, or other findings that were not obtained through legitimate research activities.

2.2 Data Falsification

Manipulating research materials, instruments, procedures, datasets, or findings in a manner that misrepresents the actual research process or results.

2.3 Plagiarism

Presenting another person's words, ideas, data, figures, or intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgement. JoSSEd screens manuscripts using Turnitin and applies a maximum similarity threshold of 20%. Manuscripts exceeding this threshold are rejected during initial editorial screening.

2.4 Image and Figure Manipulation

Inappropriately modifying, duplicating, selectively enhancing, or misrepresenting images, graphs, figures, or visual research evidence in ways that distort the original findings.

2.5 Duplicate and Redundant Publication

Publishing substantially the same research findings in multiple publications without appropriate disclosure, justification, or acknowledgement.

2.6 Unethical Authorship Practices

Engaging in gift authorship, ghost authorship, coercive authorship, unauthorized changes to author lists, or other practices that misrepresent scholarly contributions.

2.7 Peer-Review Manipulation

Attempting to influence or compromise the peer-review process through fabricated reviewer identities, false contact information, undisclosed conflicts of interest, collusion, or other deceptive practices.

2.8 Citation Manipulation

Inappropriately adding citations to increase citation counts, manipulate scholarly metrics, or benefit particular authors, journals, or institutions without legitimate scholarly justification.

2.9 Ethical Violations Involving Research Participants

Conducting research involving human participants without required ethical approval, informed consent, appropriate privacy protection, or other applicable ethical safeguards.

2.10 Misuse of Artificial Intelligence

Using artificial intelligence tools to fabricate research data, generate false references, create misleading research findings, conceal plagiarism, or misrepresent the authenticity of scholarly contributions.

2.11 Other Publication Misconduct

Other misconduct may include deliberate concealment of relevant conflicts of interest, falsified ethical approval, misleading research reporting, unauthorized use of confidential information, or other serious violations of publication ethics.

3. Reporting Allegations of Research Misconduct

JoSSEd welcomes credible reports of suspected research misconduct from authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, research participants, and other concerned parties.

Allegations should be submitted to the editorial office through the journal's official communication channels. Reports should include sufficient information to enable an initial assessment.

Where possible, reports should provide:

• The title, authors, DOI, or other identifying details of the manuscript or published article.
• A clear description of the suspected misconduct.
• Relevant supporting evidence, documents, or source references.
• Identification of the sections, data, figures, or materials involved.
• Contact information for follow-up communication, where the complainant is willing to provide it.

Anonymous allegations may be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and credible evidence. The journal will not dismiss a concern solely because the complainant has not disclosed their identity.

4. Initial Assessment of Allegations

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor without a relevant conflict of interest will conduct a preliminary assessment.

The initial assessment aims to determine whether the allegation is sufficiently specific, relevant to the journal's responsibilities, and supported by evidence that warrants further examination.

The editorial team may review the manuscript, published article, similarity reports, research documentation, supporting files, editorial correspondence, and other relevant materials.

Allegations that are clearly unsupported may be closed following a documented preliminary assessment. Credible concerns will proceed to further evaluation.

5. Investigation and Evaluation Procedures

When a credible allegation is identified, JoSSEd will follow an appropriate process based on the nature and seriousness of the concern.

1. Documentation: The editorial team records the allegation and preserves relevant evidence and correspondence.
2. Conflict of Interest Assessment: Editors with relevant conflicts are excluded from handling the case.
3. Preliminary Review: Available evidence is examined to determine the nature and credibility of the concern.
4. Author Notification: Where appropriate, the corresponding author and other relevant authors are informed of the concern and invited to provide an explanation.
5. Evidence Evaluation: The journal may request original data, research records, ethical approval documentation, or other relevant evidence.
6. Expert Consultation: Independent experts may be consulted when specialist scientific or technical assessment is required.
7. Institutional Referral: Cases requiring formal investigation beyond the journal's authority may be referred to the authors' institutions or other competent bodies.
8. Editorial Decision: The journal determines appropriate publication-related actions based on the available evidence and any relevant investigation findings.
9. Documentation and Follow-Up: The outcome and supporting rationale are recorded, and necessary editorial or post-publication actions are implemented.

JoSSEd may suspend manuscript processing while serious concerns are being evaluated. The journal does not claim the authority to make formal institutional findings of research misconduct where such determinations require an investigation by an appropriate institution or authority.

6. Authors' Right to Respond

Authors who are the subject of credible allegations will ordinarily be given an appropriate opportunity to respond and provide relevant explanations or supporting documentation before a final misconduct-related editorial decision is made.

Authors are expected to cooperate with reasonable requests for clarification, research data, methodological information, ethical approval records, or other relevant evidence.

Failure to provide requested information may be considered when evaluating the reliability of the research and determining appropriate editorial action.

The journal will distinguish between deliberate misconduct, honest error, differences in scientific interpretation, and legitimate academic disagreement.

7. Allegations Involving Submitted Manuscripts

If suspected misconduct is identified before publication, the editorial team may suspend peer review, request clarification, obtain additional evidence, or refer the matter for institutional investigation.

When serious ethical violations are substantiated, the manuscript may be rejected.

Manuscripts that exceed the journal's maximum Turnitin similarity threshold of 20% will be rejected during initial editorial screening in accordance with the Plagiarism Policy. A similarity score alone, however, does not constitute proof of research misconduct.

The journal may decline to proceed with publication when the reliability, originality, or ethical acceptability of a manuscript cannot be adequately established.

8. Allegations Involving Published Articles

JoSSEd will evaluate credible concerns about published articles regardless of when the concerns are reported.

Depending on the nature and severity of the issue, appropriate actions may include:

• Correction: Publishing a correction when an error can be addressed without invalidating the main findings.
• Expression of Concern: Informing readers of serious unresolved concerns when the available evidence warrants such a notice.
• Retraction: Retracting an article when its findings are unreliable due to misconduct or serious error, or when other circumstances justify retraction under recognized publication ethics guidance.
• Institutional Notification: Referring relevant evidence to the appropriate institution or authority when a formal investigation is necessary.
• No Further Action: Closing a case when concerns are not substantiated and no corrective publication action is warranted.

Post-publication notices will be clearly identified, appropriately linked to the original article, and made accessible to readers. Retraction notices will explain the reason for retraction while avoiding unsupported allegations.

9. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for conducting and reporting research honestly, accurately, and ethically.

Authors must:

• Ensure the authenticity and accuracy of research data and findings.
• Maintain appropriate research records and supporting documentation.
• Obtain ethical approval and informed consent where required.
• Accurately report research methods, analyses, limitations, and results.
• Provide appropriate citations and acknowledgements.
• Disclose relevant funding sources and competing interests.
• Cooperate with reasonable editorial inquiries concerning research integrity.
• Promptly notify the journal when significant errors or ethical concerns are identified in their work.

10. Responsibilities of Editors and Reviewers

Editors must respond appropriately to credible allegations of research misconduct and ensure that relevant concerns are evaluated fairly, independently, and without unnecessary delay.

Editors must maintain appropriate confidentiality, manage conflicts of interest, preserve relevant records, and avoid making unsupported accusations.

Reviewers who identify potential research misconduct must promptly inform the handling editor and provide relevant supporting information. Reviewers must not independently contact authors, disclose confidential manuscript information, or publicly circulate allegations obtained through the peer-review process.

Editors and reviewers must not use allegations of misconduct to disadvantage competitors, influence academic disputes, or obtain personal or professional benefits.

11. Confidentiality, Fairness, and Protection Against Retaliation

JoSSEd handles allegations with appropriate confidentiality to protect the integrity of the evaluation process and the legitimate interests of all parties involved.

Information about allegations will be shared only with individuals or institutions that have a legitimate role in evaluating or resolving the concern, subject to applicable legal and ethical obligations.

The journal does not tolerate retaliation within its editorial processes against individuals who raise research integrity concerns in good faith.

Knowingly false or malicious allegations may themselves raise ethical concerns and will be handled appropriately. However, an allegation that is not substantiated will not automatically be treated as malicious.

12. Institutional Cooperation and External Investigation

JoSSEd recognizes that research institutions and other competent authorities may be better positioned to conduct formal investigations into allegations involving laboratory records, participant recruitment, research approvals, or the authenticity of primary data.

Where appropriate, the journal may refer allegations to relevant institutions and request information about the outcome of an investigation.

The journal will retain responsibility for editorial and publication-related decisions, including whether a manuscript should proceed, be rejected, or whether a published article requires correction, an expression of concern, or retraction.

13. Appeals and Reconsideration

Individuals directly affected by an editorial decision related to an allegation of research misconduct may submit a reasoned request for reconsideration, supported by relevant evidence.

Where feasible, reconsideration will be handled by an editor or qualified individual who was not responsible for the original decision and who has no relevant conflict of interest.

Reconsideration does not guarantee reversal of the original decision. The journal may uphold, modify, or withdraw an editorial action based on the available evidence.

14. Research Misconduct Handling Procedure

15. Ethical Guidelines and References

This policy is informed by internationally recognized guidance on research integrity and responsible scholarly publishing, particularly:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): https://publicationethics.org/
• COPE Core Practices: https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE): https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/