Allegation of Research Misconduct

Allegation of Research Misconduct

Jurnal Gizi dan Kesehatan (JGK) is committed to research integrity, academic honesty, transparency, and ethical scholarly publishing. The journal takes allegations of research misconduct seriously and addresses suspected violations through fair, impartial, confidential, and evidence-based procedures.

In handling allegations, JSSP is guided by the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and relevant standards of responsible research and editorial practice.

Definition and Scope of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes unethical practices that compromise the originality, credibility, reliability, or integrity of research and scholarly publications. Such practices may occur during research design, data collection, analysis, manuscript preparation, peer review, or publication.

For this policy, research and publication integrity concerns include:

Fabrication: Inventing data, participant responses, interview accounts, observations, documentary evidence, or findings and presenting them as authentic.
Falsification: Manipulating research procedures, datasets, analyses, quotations, or findings in ways that misrepresent the research.
Plagiarism: Using another person’s words, ideas, findings, analytical frameworks, or intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgement.
Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Publishing substantially overlapping research without appropriate disclosure, justification, or authorization.
Authorship Misconduct: Including individuals who do not qualify for authorship, excluding eligible contributors, or manipulating authorship attribution.
Data and Image Manipulation: Inappropriately modifying, omitting, or misrepresenting data, figures, images, recordings, or other supporting evidence.
Citation Manipulation: Adding irrelevant references or imposing coercive citation requests to artificially increase citation metrics.
Peer-Review Manipulation: Using false reviewer identities, compromising reviewer independence, or improperly influencing editorial decisions.
Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Concealing relevant financial, institutional, professional, personal, political, or organizational relationships.
Research Ethics Violations: Failing to obtain required ethical approval or informed consent, breaching confidentiality, or disregarding participant protection.
Misleading Research Declarations: Providing false information about ethics approval, funding, data availability, research procedures, or other required disclosures.
Misuse of Artificial Intelligence: Presenting AI-generated references, participant accounts, documents, or findings as authentic evidence, or concealing substantive AI use contrary to journal policy.

In nutrition and health research, particular attention is given to the accurate representation of sources, protection of sensitive information, and ethical treatment of participants. This includes individuals or communities potentially exposed to surveillance, retaliation, discrimination, stigmatization, or political pressure.

Honest errors, legitimate differences in interpretation, theoretical disagreements, and methodological debates do not automatically constitute misconduct. Political disagreement or criticism of an institution is not, by itself, evidence of an ethical violation.

Reporting Allegations

Researchers, readers, reviewers, editors, institutional representatives, and other concerned individuals may report suspected misconduct involving manuscripts submitted to or published in JGK.

Reports should include:

The manuscript or article title and identifying details;
The names of the authors involved, where available;
A clear description of the concern;
Supporting evidence, documents, or references; and
Contact information for clarification, where appropriate.

Reports should be submitted through the journal’s official editorial contact channels.

JGK considers concerns raised in good faith. Anonymous reports may also be assessed when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable evidence. An allegation that cannot be substantiated is not necessarily malicious; knowingly false or deliberately misleading allegations may require separate consideration.

Preliminary Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor will assess whether the allegation falls within the journal’s responsibilities and whether sufficient evidence warrants further examination.

This assessment may involve reviewing:

submitted or published manuscripts;
similarity reports and relevant source publications;
research data and analytical outputs;
interview, observational, documentary, or archival evidence;
ethics approval and consent documentation;
authorship and funding declarations; and
relevant editorial correspondence.

Similarity scores and AI-detection results are screening indicators and do not independently establish misconduct.

Potential conflicts of interest involving complainants, authors, reviewers, or editors will be considered. Anyone with a relevant conflict must not oversee the assessment.

The journal may request clarification or additional documentation before deciding whether further investigation is necessary.

Investigation Procedures

When credible concerns warrant further examination, JGK will conduct an editorial assessment appropriate to the case.

The process may include:

Evidence Examination: Reviewing relevant manuscripts, research records, declarations, and supporting materials.
Author Notification: Informing the corresponding author of the substantive concerns and requesting an explanation from the relevant authors.
Independent Evaluation: Consulting qualified methodological, statistical, subject, or research-ethics specialists where necessary.
Institutional Referral: Requesting investigation by relevant institutions or research-integrity bodies when the matter requires authority or access beyond the journal’s remit.
Assessment of Responses: Evaluating explanations and documentation while providing affected individuals a reasonable opportunity to respond.
Editorial Determination: Deciding what action is necessary to protect the scholarly record.

Research institutions normally have primary responsibility for formal investigations into the conduct of their researchers. The journal’s role is to assess the reliability and ethical acceptability of submitted or published work and determine appropriate editorial action.

Peer review, production, or publication may be suspended while serious concerns are assessed. Protective editorial action need not await a final institutional finding when the available evidence warrants it.

Confidentiality and Fair Treatment

Allegations will be handled confidentially to the extent practicable and consistent with fair assessment and applicable obligations.

Information will be shared only with individuals or institutions whose involvement is necessary. Absolute confidentiality cannot be guaranteed where referral or disclosure is required.

JGK respects the rights and reputations of all affected parties. An allegation is not proof of misconduct.

The journal does not tolerate retaliation within its editorial processes against individuals who raise concerns or cooperate in good faith. Requests for sensitive research materials will consider participant consent, confidentiality, and potential risks to individuals or communities.

Editorial Decisions and Corrective Actions

Depending on the evidence and seriousness of the concern, JGK may take one or more of the following actions:

No Further Action: Close the case when concerns are adequately resolved or unsupported.
Clarification or Revision: Request explanations, documentation, or changes to a submitted manuscript.
Manuscript Rejection: Reject work where established violations or unresolved concerns prevent publication.
Correction: Publish a notice addressing errors that do not invalidate the article’s principal contribution.
Expression of Concern: Alert readers to serious unresolved concerns or an ongoing investigation.
Retraction: Withdraw confidence in an article when its reliability or ethical integrity is fundamentally compromised.
Institutional Notification: Inform relevant institutions, funders, or research-integrity bodies where appropriate.
Other Proportionate Measures: Apply additional editorial measures justified by verified findings and journal policy.

Actions are intended to protect readers and the scholarly record. A correction or retraction does not, by itself, establish intentional misconduct.

Retraction of Published Articles

JGK may consider retraction when:

Findings are unreliable because of fabrication, falsification, major error, or substantial inaccuracies;
The article contains plagiarism or significant unauthorized use of material;
Substantially the same findings were published elsewhere without appropriate disclosure or justification;
The research involves serious ethical violations;
Data, quotations, documents, images, or other evidence have been substantially manipulated;
Peer-review manipulation undermines confidence in the publication process; or
Other established violations fundamentally compromise the article’s reliability or ethical integrity.

An authorship dispute alone does not normally justify retraction when the findings remain reliable. Such cases will be assessed under the journal’s authorship policy.

Retraction notices will clearly identify the affected article, explain the reasons and basis for the decision, and link to the original publication.

The article will ordinarily remain accessible and clearly marked as retracted. Removal of content will be considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as serious privacy concerns or applicable legal requirements, with an explanatory notice retained where feasible.

Responsibilities of Relevant Parties

Authors must ensure accurate reporting, originality, ethical compliance, transparent declarations, and responsible handling of research materials. They must cooperate with reasonable editorial requests and promptly report significant errors.

Reviewers must confidentially notify editors of suspected plagiarism, unreliable evidence, methodological irregularities, or ethical concerns. They must not independently contact authors or conduct unauthorized investigations.

Editors and Editorial Board Members must assess concerns impartially, manage conflicts of interest, protect confidential information, and take proportionate action.

Research Institutions are expected to investigate serious concerns involving their researchers and communicate findings relevant to the reliability or ethical integrity of the publication.

Complainants should provide accurate information, distinguish evidence from inference, and cooperate with reasonable requests for clarification.

Appeals and Reconsideration

Authors or other affected parties may submit a reasoned appeal through the journal’s official editorial contact channels.

An appeal should identify:

the decision being challenged;
specific factual errors or procedural concerns;
relevant new evidence; and
the grounds for reconsideration.

Where appropriate, an appeal will be assessed by an editor or independent expert without a relevant conflict of interest.

JGK will determine whether further clarification, investigation, or changes to the editorial action are warranted. An appeal does not automatically suspend a notice necessary to inform readers of a serious concern.

Commitment to Publication Integrity

Jurnal Gizi dan Kesehatan (JGK) seeks to maintain credible, accountable, and ethically responsible scholarship in social and political studies.

These procedures operate alongside the journal’s policies on publication ethics, authorship, plagiarism, conflicts of interest, peer review, AI use, research ethics, and corrections and retractions.

Ethical Guidance