Allegations of Research Misconduct

1. Policy Statement

The journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and research integrity. The journal takes reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of manuscripts involving research misconduct, including but not limited to plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification, data fabrication, duplicate submission, redundant publication, unethical authorship practices, and undisclosed conflicts of interest.

The journal, its editors, editorial board members, reviewers, and publisher do not encourage, tolerate, or knowingly allow any form of research misconduct. Any allegation of misconduct related to submitted or published articles will be handled seriously, fairly, confidentially, and in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics or equivalent standards.

2. Forms of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

Plagiarism
Using another person’s words, ideas, data, or work without proper acknowledgment.
Self-plagiarism or redundant publication
Reusing substantial parts of one’s own previously published work without proper citation or justification.
Data fabrication
Making up data, results, or research findings.
Data falsification
Manipulating research data, materials, processes, or results so that the research record is inaccurate.
Citation manipulation
Adding irrelevant or unnecessary citations to increase citation counts or influence journal metrics.
Authorship misconduct
Including guest authorship, gift authorship, ghost authorship, or excluding individuals who made substantial contributions.
Duplicate submission
Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time.
Undisclosed conflict of interest
Failing to disclose financial, institutional, personal, or academic interests that may influence the research.
Ethical approval violations
Conducting research involving humans, animals, or sensitive data without appropriate ethical clearance when required.

3. Identification of Research Misconduct

The journal identifies potential research misconduct through several mechanisms:

Initial editorial screening
All submitted manuscripts are checked by the editorial team before peer review.
Similarity checking
Manuscripts may be screened using plagiarism detection software or other similarity-checking tools.
Reviewer evaluation
Peer reviewers may report suspected plagiarism, data problems, citation manipulation, ethical concerns, or methodological irregularities.
Editorial assessment
Editors may examine references, data consistency, authorship information, ethical approval statements, and conflicts of interest.
Post-publication reports
Allegations may be submitted by readers, reviewers, institutions, authors, or other parties after publication.

4. Procedure for Handling Allegations of Research Misconduct

When an allegation of research misconduct is received, the journal will follow the procedure below:

Step 1: Preliminary Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or appointed editor will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the allegation has sufficient basis and falls within the scope of research misconduct.

Step 2: Confidential Documentation

All allegations, evidence, correspondence, and editorial decisions will be documented confidentially. The identity of the complainant will be protected where appropriate.

Step 3: Author Notification

If the allegation appears credible, the corresponding author will be contacted and given an opportunity to provide a clear explanation, supporting evidence, or correction.

Step 4: Editorial Investigation

The editorial team may examine the manuscript, similarity report, raw data, ethical approval documents, authorship contribution statement, references, and any other relevant materials.

Step 5: Consultation

When necessary, the journal may consult editorial board members, external experts, reviewers, the publisher, or the authors’ institution to ensure a fair and objective assessment.

Step 6: Editorial Decision

Based on the evidence, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

reject the manuscript;
request revision or clarification;
issue a correction;
publish an expression of concern;
retract the article;
notify the authors’ institution or affiliated organization;
ban the author from future submission for a specified period;
take other actions in accordance with COPE or equivalent ethical standards.

5. Handling Misconduct in Submitted Manuscripts

If research misconduct is identified before publication, the journal may reject the manuscript immediately. The authors will be informed of the reason for rejection. In serious cases, the journal may notify the authors’ institution or relevant authority.

6. Handling Misconduct in Published Articles

If misconduct is identified after publication, the journal will investigate the case carefully. Depending on the severity of the misconduct, the journal may publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction notice. Retraction notices will clearly state the reason for retraction and will remain permanently linked to the original article.

7. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

The journal may issue:

Correction
When an honest error is found but the main findings remain valid.
Expression of Concern
When there is serious doubt about the integrity of an article but the investigation is still ongoing or inconclusive.
Retraction
When there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable due to misconduct or major error.

8. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for:

ensuring fair and confidential handling of allegations;
avoiding conflicts of interest during investigation;
providing authors with an opportunity to respond;
making decisions based on evidence;
following COPE guidelines or equivalent standards;
protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.

9. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for:

ensuring the originality and integrity of their work;
avoiding plagiarism, data fabrication, and falsification;
providing raw data when requested;
disclosing conflicts of interest;
obtaining ethical approval when required;
ensuring that all listed authors meet authorship criteria;
correcting errors promptly when discovered.

10. Reporting Allegations

Any party who suspects research misconduct in a submitted or published manuscript may submit a report to the editorial office. The report should include: