Research Misconduct Policy
Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to, data fabrication or falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, redundant publication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, authorship manipulation (e.g., gift or ghost authorship), and manipulation of the peer review process (e.g., reviewer coercion or fake peer review).
Reporting Concerns
Concerns may be raised by editors, reviewers, readers, or third parties at any stage — before or after publication.
Reports should be submitted to the relevant journal's editorial office with as much supporting detail as possible.
All reports are treated confidentially, and the process protects whistleblowers from retaliation.
Investigation Process
The Editor-in-Chief, or a designated ethics committee, reviews the allegation following COPE flowcharts and guidance.
The accused party is given a fair opportunity to respond before any conclusion is reached.
Where appropriate, the matter is referred to the author's or reviewer's institution for formal investigation, with the journal retaining authority over any resulting editorial action.
Possible Outcomes
No action, where allegations are unsubstantiated.
Correction, where errors are found that do not undermine overall validity.
Expression of Concern, pending a fuller investigation.
Retraction, where misconduct is confirmed or findings are shown to be unreliable.
Formal notification to the individual's institution and/or funding body, and a bar on future submissions, in serious or repeated cases.