Research Misconduct Policy

UltimaComm : Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi

1. Research and Publication Misconduct

UltimaComm treats the following as potential forms of research or publication misconduct

a. Plagiarism and substantial unattributed text recycling.
b. Fabrication or falsification of data, evidence, references, or research procedures.
c. Duplicate or redundant publication and undisclosed simultaneous submission.
d. Inappropriate authorship attribution or unresolved authorship manipulation.
e. Citation manipulation or coercive citation practices.
f. Undisclosed conflicts of interest that materially affect the integrity of the work.
g. Unethical research involving human participants or personal data.
h. Image manipulation or misrepresentation of empirical evidence.
i. Inappropriate or undisclosed AI use that compromises research integrity.
j. Peer-review manipulation, including fabricated reviewer identities or fraudulent review reports.
k. Retaliation against individuals who raise good-faith concerns about research or publication integrity.

The journal distinguishes between deliberate misconduct, negligent practice, honest error, and correctable deficiencies. Allegations must be evaluated on the evidence available rather than on assumptions about an author's identity, reputation, or institutional affiliation.

2. Procedures for Handling Allegations of Misconduct

When a credible concern is raised, the journal will follow a fair, confidential, proportionate, and documented process.
Stage 1: Preliminary assessment. The editor-in-chief or an authorized editor assesses the nature and credibility of the allegation, its relevance to publication ethics, and any immediate risks to the integrity of the scholarly record.
Stage 2: Notification and response. Where appropriate, the corresponding author and other relevant parties are invited to provide an explanation and supporting documentation. The journal will allow a reasonable opportunity to respond and will avoid treating an allegation as proven before the evidence has been assessed.
Stage 3: Further investigation. When necessary, the journal may request additional evidence, consult independent experts, or refer the matter to the relevant author's institution, research ethics committee, funder, or other competent body. The journal is not a substitute for a formal institutional investigation.
Stage 4: Editorial determination. Based on the available evidence, the journal determines whether the concern is substantiated, remains inconclusive, or is not supported. The decision and its rationale must be documented.
Stage 5: Appropriate action. Depending on the findings and the manuscript's publication status, actions may include requesting clarification, correction, revision, rejection, suspension of editorial processing, notification of relevant institutions, publication of an expression of concern, or retraction.
Confidentiality will be maintained as far as reasonably possible, subject to the requirements of a fair investigation and applicable legal or institutional obligations. The journal will not tolerate retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith.

3. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

UltimaComm is committed to preserving the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record after publication.
Corrections may be issued when an error or omission can be rectified without invalidating the principal findings or conclusions of the article.
Expressions of concern may be published when credible concerns exist about a published article but an investigation remains unresolved or the available evidence is insufficient for a definitive determination.
Retractions may be issued when substantial evidence demonstrates that an article's findings or conclusions are unreliable, or when serious ethical or publication violations compromise the integrity of the work. Relevant grounds may include fabricated data, substantial plagiarism, unethical research practices, serious manipulation of evidence, compromised peer review, or material publication misconduct.
Retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record, not merely to punish an author. Retraction notices must clearly identify the affected article, explain the principal reason for the action, and remain linked to the original publication. The original article should remain identifiable as retracted rather than being silently removed, subject to applicable legal and safety requirements.
Editorial action may be taken regardless of whether misconduct is established before or after publication. Honest errors must be distinguished from misconduct, and the response must be proportionate to the nature and consequences of the problem.