Policies

Allegations of misconduct

How to report misconduct and how the journal investigates it.

  • Aligned with COPE Core Practices
  • 2 min read
On this page

At a glance

  • Every allegation is investigated following COPE flowcharts.
  • Reports can be confidential or anonymous.
  • Authors always get the chance to respond.
Report a concern to
redaksi@sarimedika.com

Journal of Educational Science and Development investigates every allegation of research or publication misconduct, whether it concerns a submitted manuscript or a published article, following COPE's flowcharts and its guidance on cooperation with research institutions.

What counts as misconduct

  • Fabrication: making up data or results.
  • Falsification: manipulating materials, images, data or analysis so that the research is not accurately represented.
  • Plagiarism, including self-plagiarism and duplicate publication.
  • Image manipulation beyond acceptable adjustments of brightness or contrast applied to the whole image.
  • Authorship misconduct: ghost, guest or gift authorship, or adding authors without their consent.
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
  • Citation manipulation: excessive or irrelevant self-citation, or citations requested by reviewers or editors to boost their own metrics.
  • Peer review manipulation, such as fake reviewer accounts.
  • Research without the required ethical approval or consent.
  • Use of a paper mill or purchase of authorship.

How to report

Send your concern to redaksi@sarimedika.com, with as much detail and evidence as possible. You may report anonymously; we only need enough information to investigate. Allegations are handled confidentially, and whistle-blowers acting in good faith are protected.

How an allegation is handled

  1. The editor acknowledges the report and checks whether it relates to the journal and has substance.
  2. The editor gathers the facts, consulting reviewers or experts where needed, without prejudging the outcome.
  3. The authors are told about the concern and given the chance to respond.
  4. If the response is unsatisfactory, the editor contacts the authors' institution and asks it to investigate.
  5. The editor decides on the action, in proportion to what was found.

Possible outcomes

  • No action, if the concern is unfounded; the authors are told.
  • An explanation or education for minor issues arising from misunderstanding.
  • Rejection of the manuscript before publication.
  • A correction, expression of concern or retraction after publication.
  • Notifying the authors' institution, funders or other journals affected.
  • In serious cases, a temporary ban on submissions from the authors.

Official references

This policy follows these published standards and guidelines. Each link opens the original source.