Allegations of Research Misconduct

Jurnal Sistem Informasi dan Teknik Informatika (JAFOTIK), published by Lentera Ilmu Publisher, is committed to maintaining the integrity, transparency, and reliability of the scholarly record. The journal takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously and is committed to handling such allegations fairly, confidentially, objectively, and in accordance with recognized publication ethics standards.

Research misconduct includes actions or omissions that violate accepted standards of research integrity, publication ethics, or responsible scholarly conduct. JAFOTIK seeks to ensure that all manuscripts submitted to and published in the journal meet appropriate standards of originality, accuracy, accountability, and ethical research practice.

1. Definition of Research Misconduct

For the purposes of this policy, research misconduct refers to intentional, knowing, or otherwise serious violations of accepted research and publication standards. Allegations will be assessed according to the nature of the conduct, the available evidence, the applicable institutional policies, and relevant ethical guidelines.

Research misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

1. Fabrication: Inventing data, research findings, experimental results, participants, or other research information and presenting them as genuine.

2. Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, data, images, or results in a manner that misrepresents the research record.

3. Plagiarism: Using another person's words, ideas, data, methods, code, figures, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment.

4. Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Publishing substantially overlapping research outputs without appropriate disclosure or submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously.

5. Authorship Misconduct: Improperly assigning authorship, omitting eligible contributors, including individuals who do not qualify for authorship, or misrepresenting author contributions.

6. Citation Manipulation: Deliberately adding irrelevant citations, engaging in coercive citation practices, or manipulating references to inappropriately inflate citation metrics.

7. Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Failing to disclose relevant financial, professional, personal, or institutional interests that could influence the research or its evaluation.

8. Ethical and Legal Violations: Conducting research without required ethical approval or authorization, misusing confidential information, violating applicable data protection requirements, or using third-party material without required permission.

9. Peer-Review Misconduct: Breaching reviewer confidentiality, manipulating the peer-review process, impersonating reviewers, or attempting to improperly influence editorial decisions.

10. Misuse of Artificial Intelligence: Using AI tools to fabricate data, generate false references, manipulate research findings, misrepresent authorship, or conceal plagiarism or other research misconduct.

Honest errors, reasonable differences in interpretation, and legitimate scientific disagreements do not automatically constitute research misconduct. Each allegation will be evaluated on its merits and in context.

2. Reporting Allegations

Any individual who has credible concerns about potential research misconduct involving a manuscript submitted to or an article published in JAFOTIK may report the matter to the editorial team.

Reports may be submitted by authors, reviewers, readers, researchers, institutions, or other parties with relevant information. Allegations should include, where possible:

• A clear description of the suspected misconduct.

• The title, DOI, or other identifying information of the relevant manuscript or published article.

• Supporting evidence, such as relevant publications, datasets, source code, similarity reports, images, correspondence, or other documentation.

• An explanation of how the evidence supports the allegation.

Reports should be submitted through the journal's official contact channels listed on its website. JAFOTIK encourages reports made in good faith and will assess credible concerns regardless of the reporter's identity or professional position.

Anonymous allegations may be considered when sufficient information and evidence are available to permit a meaningful assessment.

3. Preliminary Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the scope of this policy and whether sufficient information is available to justify further investigation.

The preliminary assessment may include reviewing the submitted evidence, examining the manuscript or published article, checking relevant source materials, and consulting appropriate editorial or technical expertise.

Where necessary, the journal may request additional information from the reporter, the corresponding author, other authors, or relevant parties.

If the allegation is unsupported, outside the journal's remit, or clearly attributable to a misunderstanding or honest error, the journal may close the matter with an appropriate record of its assessment. Where the concern is credible and potentially serious, the journal will proceed with further investigation.

4. Investigation Procedure

When an allegation warrants further examination, JAFOTIK will conduct an impartial investigation proportionate to the seriousness and complexity of the case.

The investigation may involve the following steps:

1. Evidence Review: Examine the manuscript, published article, source materials, research data, relevant correspondence, and other available evidence.

2. Author Notification: Inform the corresponding author or relevant authors of the concern and provide an appropriate opportunity to respond, subject to confidentiality and any necessary investigative safeguards.

3. Request for Documentation: Request original datasets, research records, ethical approvals, permissions, code repositories, or other materials relevant to the allegation.

4. Independent Consultation: Seek advice from qualified experts, independent editors, research integrity officers, or other appropriate specialists when necessary.

5. Institutional Referral: Refer the matter to the authors' affiliated institution or another competent body when the investigation requires access to records or authority beyond the journal's remit.

6. Editorial Determination: Evaluate the available evidence and determine the appropriate editorial action within the journal's authority.

JAFOTIK recognizes that some allegations, particularly those involving data fabrication, falsification, or serious institutional misconduct, may require a formal investigation by the authors' institutions. The journal's investigation does not replace the responsibilities of those institutions.

5. Confidentiality and Protection Against Retaliation

JAFOTIK will handle allegations and related documentation confidentially to the extent reasonably possible and consistent with a fair investigation, applicable law, and publication ethics obligations.

Information will be shared only with individuals who need it to assess or investigate the allegation, or where disclosure is otherwise necessary or legally required.

The journal does not tolerate intimidation, harassment, or retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith or cooperate with an investigation.

At the same time, allegations must be handled responsibly. Knowingly false accusations, deliberate fabrication of evidence, or malicious attempts to damage another person's reputation may be referred to the appropriate authority where justified.

6. Responsibilities of Authors and Other Parties

Authors are expected to cooperate with legitimate inquiries concerning the integrity of their submitted or published work. They should provide accurate explanations and relevant supporting documentation within a reasonable timeframe.

The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the editorial team on behalf of the authors, but all co-authors may be asked to clarify their individual contributions or knowledge of the research when necessary.

Reviewers and editors must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and maintain confidentiality throughout the investigation. Individuals who have a direct interest in the outcome must not participate in decisions where their impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

7. Interim Measures

While an allegation is being investigated, JAFOTIK may take appropriate interim measures to protect the integrity of the editorial process and the scholarly record.

Depending on the circumstances, these measures may include:

• Temporarily suspending the peer-review or publication process.

• Requesting additional documentation or independent assessment.

• Delaying publication until material concerns have been resolved.

• Publishing an expression of concern for an already published article when there is a substantial, credible concern that cannot be resolved promptly and readers need to be informed.

Interim measures do not constitute a final finding of misconduct and will be reviewed as further evidence becomes available.

8. Editorial Decisions and Corrective Actions

After evaluating the available evidence and any relevant responses, JAFOTIK will determine the appropriate action based on the seriousness, scope, and consequences of the alleged misconduct.

Possible actions include:

1. Closing the case when the allegation is not substantiated.

2. Requesting clarification, correction, or additional documentation.

3. Requiring revisions before the manuscript can proceed.

4. Rejecting the manuscript when serious ethical or scientific concerns remain unresolved.

5. Issuing a correction or publishing an expression of concern for an affected published article.

6. Retracting a published article when the evidence establishes that its reliability or ethical validity is seriously compromised.

7. Referring substantiated concerns to the relevant institution, publisher, or other appropriate authority.

8. Restricting future submissions in cases of serious or repeated misconduct, where justified and subject to proportionate editorial review.

Editorial actions will be documented and communicated to the relevant parties as appropriate. The journal will not make public accusations of misconduct without an adequate basis.

9. Appeals and Reconsideration

Authors or other directly affected parties may submit a reasoned request for reconsideration of an editorial decision related to an allegation of research misconduct.

An appeal should identify the specific aspects of the decision being challenged and provide new evidence, relevant documentation, or a clear explanation of any alleged procedural error.

Where feasible, the appeal will be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent editor who was not directly involved in the original decision and has no relevant conflict of interest.

The journal may uphold, modify, or reverse its decision based on the available evidence. The submission of an appeal does not automatically suspend appropriate measures necessary to protect the scholarly record.

10. Misconduct Discovered After Publication

If credible evidence of research misconduct emerges after an article has been published, JAFOTIK will assess the matter in accordance with this policy and applicable publication ethics standards.

Depending on the findings, the journal may publish a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction notice. Such notices will explain the reason for the action as clearly as appropriate and will be linked to the affected article to preserve the transparency of the scholarly record.

Where necessary, the journal may notify the authors' affiliated institution, the publisher, relevant indexing services, or other appropriate parties.

11. Record Keeping and Transparency

JAFOTIK will maintain appropriate records of allegations, evidence, correspondence, investigative steps, decisions, and corrective actions, subject to confidentiality and applicable data protection requirements.

Public statements concerning an investigation will be limited to information necessary to explain an editorial decision or protect the integrity of the scholarly record. Confidential personal information and unsupported allegations will not be disclosed unnecessarily.

12. Policy and Ethical Standards

JAFOTIK will handle allegations of research misconduct in accordance with this policy, its other publication ethics policies, applicable legal requirements, and recognized publication ethics guidance, including recommendations from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The journal is committed to applying these procedures fairly, consistently, and proportionately, while respecting the rights of authors, reviewers, editors, research participants, and other affected parties.

By submitting a manuscript to JAFOTIK, authors acknowledge their responsibility to comply with the journal's research integrity and publication ethics requirements.