Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and citation manipulation in proposing, performing, reviewing, or reporting research. Fabrication means making up data or results; falsification means manipulating research materials, processes, data, or results so that the research is not accurately represented; plagiarism means using another person’s ideas, text, code, or results without proper attribution; and citation manipulation means adding citations primarily to increase the citation count of a particular author or journal. Other serious irregularities, such as duplicate publication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, authorship disputes, and unethical use of data, software, or AI tools, will be handled under the same procedure. Honest errors and differences of opinion are not considered misconduct.

Reporting an Allegation

Anyone may raise a concern about a manuscript or published article. Allegations should be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief through the journal’s official email address monica.pratiwi@umn.ac.id and should include the article title, a description of the concern, and any supporting evidence. Concerns will be handled confidentially, and anonymous reports will be considered if they contain sufficient, verifiable evidence.

Investigation Procedure

The Editors and Editorial Board follow the guidelines and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to ensure that every allegation is handled fairly, objectively, and promptly.
In the first stage, the Editor-in-Chief assesses whether the allegation is credible and whether it falls within the definition of research misconduct. The Editor also considers whether the person making the allegation has any relevant conflict of interest. Allegations that are clearly unfounded will be closed with no further action.
If misconduct or another substantial irregularity appears possible, the allegation is shared with the corresponding author, who is asked to provide a detailed response on behalf of all co-authors within 14 days. The identity of the person raising the concern will not be disclosed without their consent.
After evaluating the authors’ response, the Editors may seek further assessment from members of the Editorial Board or independent experts, such as subject specialists or reviewers with expertise in data analysis or software verification. If the authors fail to respond within the given time, or if their explanation is unsatisfactory, the journal may proceed with editorial action based on the available evidence.

Possible Outcomes

Depending on the findings, the journal may take no action if the allegation is unsubstantiated; request clarification, additional analysis, or a correction from the authors; reject a manuscript that is still under review; publish a correction, erratum, or letter to the editor; publish an expression of concern while an investigation is ongoing; or retract the article. Retraction notices will be clearly labeled and linked to the original article, which will remain accessible with a watermark indicating its retracted status. In serious cases, the journal may also decline future submissions from the authors involved for a set period.