Policy Statement
The journal is committed to protecting the integrity, accuracy, and reliability of the scholarly record. We take all allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously—whether they involve manuscripts currently under review or articles that have already been published. All cases are handled fairly, confidentially, independently, and promptly, following guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Scope of Research Misconduct
Misconduct includes, but is not limited to:
- Fabrication: Making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
- Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, or omitting/altering data.
- Plagiarism: The unacknowledged use of another person's ideas, text, data, or results.
- Redundant or Duplicate Publication: Submitting or publishing the same study across multiple venues without proper cross-referencing.
- Citation & Peer-Review Manipulation: Artificially inflating citations or tampering with the peer-review process.
- Authorship Breaches: Undisclosed conflicts of interest or ghost/guest authorship.
Reporting an Allegation
- Submission: Reports of suspected misconduct must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief via the official journal email.
- Required Information: To allow for a proper review, reports should ideally include:
- The title, manuscript ID, or DOI of the work in question.
- A clear description of the alleged violation.
- Verifiable evidence, documents, data points, or figure comparisons.
- Contact information for the complainant.
- Anonymity: Anonymous complaints may be reviewed at the Editor-in-Chief’s discretion if they are backed by sufficient verifiable evidence.
Investigation and Assessment Procedure
- Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief will conduct a preliminary review to determine if the allegation is credible and falls within the scope of research misconduct. Honest errors or differences in academic interpretation do not constitute misconduct.
- Author Notification: The corresponding author (representing all co-authors) will be formally notified in writing of the allegation and given an opportunity to respond.
- Pausing Editorial Action: For manuscripts under review, the peer-review or publication process may be paused while the investigation takes place.
- Committee / Expert Consultation: If warranted, the Editor-in-Chief may consult members of the Editorial Board, external peer reviewers, or refer the matter to the author's home institution or funding body.
Resolution and Actions Taken
Depending on the severity and verification of the misconduct, actions may include:
- For Unpublished Manuscripts:
- Immediate rejection of the manuscript.
- A formal ban on future submissions by the authors to the journal.
- For Published Articles:
- Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum): Issued if an error affects interpretation but leaves the core work reliable.
- Retraction: Issued if the findings are unreliable, research is unethical, or a severe breach (such as major fabrication or plagiarism) invalidates the paper. A permanent retraction notice will be linked to the article.
- Notification: Informing the author's institution, employer, or funding agency of the outcome.
- Communication and Closure: Both authors and (where confidential guidelines allow) complainants will be informed of the final resolution. Case files and records are securely stored by the Editorial Office.
