Allegations of Research Misconduct

JMPI: Jurnal Manajemen, Pendidikan dan Pemikiran Islam is committed to maintaining research integrity, publication ethics, transparency, and accountability throughout the editorial and publication process. The journal takes all allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously and handles them fairly, objectively, and confidentially, in accordance with the principles outlined in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and relevant COPE guidelines on research integrity and publication misconduct.

An allegation of misconduct does not, by itself, establish that misconduct has occurred. All concerns will be assessed on the basis of available evidence, with due consideration for the rights and responsibilities of all parties involved.

1. Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to, the following:

Fabrication: Inventing data, research findings, participants, observations, or references and presenting them as genuine.
Falsification: Manipulating research materials, procedures, data, images, or results, or omitting relevant information in a manner that misrepresents the research.
Plagiarism: Using another person's words, ideas, data, figures, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment.
Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Publishing substantially overlapping work without appropriate disclosure or justification, or submitting the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals.
Authorship Misconduct: Inappropriately assigning, omitting, or misrepresenting authorship or contributorship.
Citation Manipulation: Inappropriately influencing citation counts or adding irrelevant citations for the purpose of manipulating citation metrics.
Image, Figure, or Data Manipulation: Altering or presenting images, figures, or research data in ways that mislead readers regarding the validity or integrity of the findings.
Peer-Review Manipulation: Providing false reviewer identities, manipulating reviewer recommendations, or engaging in other deceptive practices intended to compromise the peer-review process.
Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Failing to disclose financial, professional, personal, or other competing interests that could improperly influence research or editorial decisions.
Research Ethics Violations: Conducting research without required ethical approval, misrepresenting informed consent, or violating applicable standards for the protection of research participants.
Misuse of Artificial Intelligence: Using AI tools to fabricate data, generate false references, misrepresent research contributions, or otherwise compromise research integrity.
Other Serious Ethical Violations: Any other practice that materially undermines the reliability, originality, attribution, or integrity of scholarly work.

Honest errors, reasonable differences in interpretation, and methodological disagreements do not automatically constitute research misconduct. Such cases will be assessed according to their nature, seriousness, and supporting evidence.

2. Reporting Allegations

Allegations may be raised by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, research institutions, funders, or other individuals with relevant information.

Reports should be submitted in writing to the JMPI editorial office through the contact information provided on the official journal website. Whenever possible, the report should include:

The title and publication status of the manuscript or article concerned.
A clear description of the suspected misconduct.
Relevant supporting evidence, such as source publications, data inconsistencies, documentation, or other verifiable information.
The name and contact details of the reporting individual, if they are willing to provide them.

Anonymous reports may be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information to support a preliminary assessment. The journal will not dismiss a concern solely because the reporting individual wishes to remain anonymous.

3. Preliminary Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately designated editor will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the journal's responsibility and whether sufficient information is available for further investigation.

The assessment may include examining the submitted manuscript, published article, source materials, similarity reports, research data, images, references, author declarations, and other relevant documentation.

Where information is insufficient, the journal may request further evidence or clarification from the reporting individual. The journal will avoid premature conclusions and will not treat an allegation as proof of wrongdoing.

The assessment will be guided by the relevant COPE flowcharts and editorial guidance.

4. Investigation and Right to Respond

When an allegation warrants further investigation, the journal will document the concerns, assess the available evidence, and provide the relevant author or other concerned party with an appropriate opportunity to respond.

Depending on the nature of the allegation, the journal may request original research data, ethics approval documents, informed consent records, source images, author contribution statements, or other relevant materials.

The journal may also consult independent subject experts, members of the editorial board who are not involved in the case, research institutions, research integrity offices, funders, or other appropriate authorities.

All parties are expected to cooperate honestly and provide accurate information. The investigation will be conducted impartially, and the confidentiality of the process will be maintained to the extent reasonably possible.

5. Referral to Research Institutions and Other Authorities

The journal recognizes that formal investigations into research misconduct are generally the responsibility of the relevant research institution or competent authority.

Where the alleged misconduct requires institutional investigation, or where the evidence raises serious concerns that cannot be resolved through editorial assessment alone, JMPI may contact the author's affiliated institution, research integrity office, research ethics committee, funder, or other appropriate authority.

In such cases, the journal will provide relevant evidence and cooperate with the investigation, following the principles of COPE guidance on cooperation between research institutions and journals.

The journal may suspend editorial processing while a serious allegation is being investigated.

6. Editorial Actions and Possible Outcomes

Editorial action will depend on the seriousness of the concern, the evidence available, the responses received, and the findings of any relevant investigation.

Possible actions include:

Closing the case where the allegation is unsupported or adequately resolved.
Requesting clarification, additional documentation, or manuscript revisions.
Rejecting a submitted manuscript when serious ethical or integrity concerns are established or remain unresolved.
Suspending editorial processing pending further investigation.
Referring the matter to the relevant institution or authority.
Publishing a correction or clarification when the published record requires amendment.
Publishing an Expression of Concern when serious questions about the integrity or reliability of a published article remain unresolved.
Retracting a published article when the evidence establishes that retraction is warranted under the journal's publication ethics policies.

For post-publication cases, JMPI will follow the relevant COPE guidance on corrections and retractions to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Any action will be proportionate to the findings and will not be based solely on an unsubstantiated allegation.

7. Confidentiality and Protection Against Unfair Treatment

JMPI will handle allegations sensitively and restrict access to case information to individuals who need it for legitimate editorial or investigative purposes.

The identity of the reporting individual will be protected where reasonably possible, particularly when confidentiality has been requested. However, absolute anonymity cannot be guaranteed in every circumstance, especially when a formal investigation requires disclosure or applicable law requires it.

The journal will avoid public accusations or premature disclosure of allegations that could cause unjustified reputational harm. Information may be shared with relevant institutions or authorities when necessary to investigate the matter and protect research integrity.

8. Appeals and Reconsideration

Individuals directly affected by an editorial decision arising from an allegation may submit a written request for reconsideration, supported by relevant evidence or an explanation.

Where practicable, the Editor-in-Chief or an editor who was not directly involved in the original assessment will review the request. The journal may seek independent advice when appropriate.

Reconsideration will focus on the fairness of the process, the evidence considered, and any significant new information. An appeal does not automatically suspend measures necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

9. Commitment to Research Integrity

JMPI expects authors, reviewers, editors, and all contributors to uphold the highest standards of honesty, transparency, and accountability in scholarly publishing.

The journal is committed to addressing credible allegations promptly and fairly, correcting the published record when necessary, and cooperating with appropriate institutions and authorities to safeguard the reliability of academic research.

For further information, readers and authors may consult the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and its resources on publication ethics and research integrity.