ALLEGATION OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

 Allegations of Research and Publication Misconduct

1. Purpose and Scope

The journal is committed to safeguarding the integrity of research, community service activities, and the scholarly publication record. This policy applies to manuscripts under consideration and published articles, including reports received after manuscript rejection or withdrawal.

Each report is assessed on its substance and supporting evidence. An allegation of misconduct does not, in itself, establish an individual's wrongdoing.

2. Types of Allegations Covered

Reportable allegations include:

• Fabrication: inventing data, results, or activities that do not exist.
• Falsification: manipulating or omitting data, images, methods, or information in a misleading manner.
• Plagiarism and the use of others' work without appropriate attribution.
• Breaches of ethics approval, participant consent, confidentiality, or the protection of research participants.
• Authorship manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, duplicate publication, or peer review manipulation.
• Forgery of supporting documents, including ethics approvals and permits.
• The use of AI to fabricate data, references, images, or evidence of activities.

For community service articles, this scope includes falsification of activity implementation, partner identities, participant numbers, documentation, evaluation results, and impact claims.

Unintentional errors and differences of scientific opinion are not automatically classified as misconduct. Nevertheless, errors affecting an article may still require editorial action.

3. Submission of Reports

Reports must be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief at the email address provided on the journal's Contact page, using the subject line “Report of Alleged Research/Publication Misconduct”.

Reporting individuals are requested to provide:

• The title, DOI, URL, or submission number of the manuscript or article concerned.
• A description of the issue and the location of the disputed content.
• Supporting evidence or comparison sources that can be examined.
• Their identity and contact details, if they are willing to disclose them.

Anonymous reports are considered if the information is sufficiently specific and verifiable. Reporting individuals are not required to prove the entire case before raising a reasonable concern.

4. Confidentiality and Fair Treatment

Case information is shared only with parties who need it for assessment or follow-up. The identity of the reporting individual is protected as far as possible, taking into account the requirements of the assessment and legal obligations.

The journal does not tolerate intimidation or retaliation against individuals who report concerns in good faith. An unsubstantiated report is not, in itself, considered a report made in bad faith.

The parties concerned are informed of the issues under examination and given a reasonable opportunity to respond.

5. Initial Assessment

The editor records the report, assesses its relevance and the adequacy of the information provided, and may request further clarification. If the reporting individual's contact details are available, the journal acknowledges receipt.

Assessment may include source comparisons, image review, document examination, or expert consultation. Similarity scores and detection-tool outputs are not used as the sole evidence of misconduct.

If the editor who would ordinarily handle the matter has a conflict of interest, responsibility is transferred to another editor or an independent party appointed by the publisher.

6. Clarification and Institutional Referral

The journal may request explanations from the authors and relevant documentation, such as original data, image files, ethics approvals, or activity implementation records.

If a formal investigation is required, the journal contacts the relevant institution or competent authority. In exceptional circumstances, such as a risk that evidence may be destroyed, the institution may be contacted before or at the same time as clarification is sought from the authors.

The journal determines action concerning the publication on the basis of the available evidence. Findings of researcher misconduct and the imposition of employment-related or academic sanctions fall within the authority of the relevant institution.

7. Editorial Action

The assessment may result in:

• Closure of the report if insufficient grounds are identified, with the possibility of reopening the case if new evidence emerges.
• A request for revision or suspension of processing when the issue remains remediable or the assessment is incomplete.
• Manuscript rejection if the issues render the manuscript unsuitable for publication.
• A correction if the error can be remedied and the main content of the article remains reliable.
• An expression of concern if serious concerns remain unresolved and readers need to be informed.
• Retraction if the evidence shows that the article is unreliable or that serious misconduct provides grounds for retraction.

These actions are intended to maintain the accuracy of the scholarly record. An article may require correction or retraction because of a serious error even when intent has not been established. Author disagreement does not automatically prevent action supported by sufficient evidence.

8. Post-Publication Transparency

Correction notices, expressions of concern, and retraction notices must provide factual explanations of the reasons for the action and be linked to the relevant article.

Retracted articles generally remain available with clear labeling. Content removal is considered only in exceptional, justifiable circumstances. Substantive changes are not made without disclosure.

9. Appeals and Review

The parties concerned may submit an appeal through the journal's official contact channels, explaining the grounds for the appeal, procedural errors, or new evidence.

The review is conducted by a party without a conflict of interest and, wherever possible, someone who was not involved in the original decision. The decision and its reasons are communicated to the parties concerned while maintaining confidentiality.

10. Documentation and Effective Date

The journal retains reports, correspondence, evidence, and the grounds for decisions under restricted access. Handling time depends on the complexity of the case; updates are provided to the parties concerned where possible.

This policy takes effect on the date announced by the journal and is reviewed periodically.