Allegation of Research Misconduct

E-Jurnal Manajemen TSM

  1. Policy Statement

E-Jurnal Manajemen TSM, published by Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi Trisakti, is dedicated to maintaining research integrity, academic honesty, and responsible scholarly publishing.

The journal treats every allegation of research misconduct seriously and handles each concern in a fair, objective, confidential, and timely manner. Its aim is to keep the published record trustworthy by assessing allegations through a transparent process grounded in evidence.

This policy draws on the principles of responsible research conduct and on the relevant guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

An allegation is not treated as proof of misconduct. Each case is examined carefully, and any action taken reflects the evidence available and the circumstances involved.

  1. Definition and Types of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means behavior that breaches accepted standards of research integrity or publication ethics and may undermine the reliability, originality, or credibility of scholarly work.

This policy covers, but is not limited to, the following types of allegations.

2.1. Data Fabrication and Falsification

  • Fabrication: inventing data, observations, participants, or results and presenting them as real.
  • Falsification: altering research materials, procedures, data, analyses, or results so that the findings are misrepresented.

2.2. Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the use of another person's ideas, wording, data, methods, figures, tables, or other intellectual contributions without proper acknowledgment. It can take the form of extensive unattributed copying, inadequate paraphrasing, or passing off someone else's work as one's own.

2.3. Duplicate or Redundant Publication

This occurs when research findings or content that substantially overlap are published more than once without proper disclosure or justification. It also includes submitting the same manuscript to several journals at the same time where this is prohibited by editorial requirements.

2.4. Authorship Misconduct

Examples include:

  • naming people as authors without their knowledge or consent;
  • leaving out people who made qualifying contributions;
  • misstating the contributions of authors;
  • changing the author list without authorization;
  • guest, gift, or ghost authorship that misrepresents who actually contributed.

2.5. Citation Manipulation

This covers practices meant to inflate citation counts or distort the scholarly record, such as coercive citation, requests for irrelevant citations, or systematically adding citations that have no genuine scholarly justification.

2.6. Manipulation of the Peer-Review Process

Examples include impersonating reviewers, supplying fake reviewer identities, manipulating reviewer recommendations, or any other conduct that compromises the independence or integrity of peer review.

2.7. Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest

Not disclosing relevant financial, personal, professional, or institutional interests may be an ethical concern when the omission materially affects the transparency, credibility, or integrity of the research or its publication.

2.8. Misuse of Artificial Intelligence

Potential misconduct involving artificial intelligence (AI) includes fabricating data or references, misrepresenting how the research was conducted, hiding AI use where the journal's policy requires disclosure, or using AI tools in ways that harm research integrity. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of what they submit and publish.

2.9. Other Ethical Violations

Other concerns include the unauthorized use of confidential information, serious breaches of applicable research ethics requirements, manipulation of images or results, and other practices that materially weaken the reliability of scholarly work.

Honest mistakes, methodological disagreements, and differing scholarly interpretations are not automatically research misconduct. Such cases are assessed according to their nature and the supporting evidence.

  1. Reporting Allegations

E-Jurnal Manajemen TSM invites authors, reviewers, readers, researchers, institutions, and other interested parties to report suspected research misconduct involving manuscripts submitted to, or articles published in, the journal.

Reports should be sent to the Editorial Office of E-Jurnal Manajemen TSM using the official contact details on the journal's website. Wherever possible, a report should include:

  1. the title and authors of the manuscript or published article;
  2. the DOI or URL of the article, if available;
  3. a clear description of the suspected misconduct;
  4. supporting evidence, such as documents, data, comparisons with other publications, or other verifiable information;
  5. the reporter's contact details, where appropriate.

Anonymous reports may be considered if they contain enough specific and verifiable information to justify an assessment. The journal does not accept an allegation as true simply because it has been made; every report is judged on its merits and the evidence available.

  1. Preliminary Assessment

On receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated editorial representative carries out a preliminary assessment to decide whether the concern falls within this policy and whether there is enough information to warrant closer examination. This may involve:

  • reviewing the allegation and the evidence provided;
  • examining the manuscript or published article concerned;
  • checking publication records, data, references, or other relevant materials;
  • asking the reporter for clarification or further documentation where appropriate;
  • consulting an independent editorial representative or subject-matter expert when needed.

If the allegation is unsupported, outside the scope of research misconduct, or can be settled through a routine editorial clarification, the journal may close the matter or take another suitable step. If credible concerns remain, the journal may proceed to a more detailed assessment.

  1. Investigation and Communication with Authors

When an allegation calls for further investigation, the journal aims to establish the facts through a fair and impartial process.

The journal may contact the corresponding author and other relevant authors to ask for an explanation, supporting data, original records, research documentation, or other information needed to evaluate the concern. Authors are given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations and submit relevant evidence. Where appropriate, the journal may also consult independent experts, editors, reviewers, research institutions, employers, or other relevant authorities.

The scope and depth of an investigation depend on the nature and seriousness of the allegation, the evidence available, and the journal's ability to verify the facts. The journal recognizes that some matters, especially those involving research data, institutional conduct, or complex research practices, may need to be investigated by the authors' institutions or other competent bodies.

The journal will not conclude that misconduct has occurred solely because an allegation was made or because an author did not respond.

  1. Referral to Institutions and Relevant Authorities

If an allegation requires information or investigative authority beyond what the journal can access, E-Jurnal Manajemen TSM may refer the matter to the relevant academic institution, research organization, employer, funding body, or other competent authority. Referral may be suitable in cases of suspected data fabrication or falsification, serious plagiarism, unethical research conduct, or other substantial integrity concerns.

The journal may ask the institution to investigate and share its findings where appropriate, and it will weigh the evidence and any institutional findings when deciding whether editorial action is needed. Referring a case to an institution does not prevent the journal from taking editorial steps to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

  1. Confidentiality and Protection of Parties

The journal handles allegations and related communications confidentially, as far as is reasonably possible and consistent with a fair assessment, applicable obligations, and the need to investigate. Information is shared only with those who reasonably need it for the assessment or investigation.

Reasonable steps are taken to protect people who raise concerns in good faith from retaliation. At the same time, authors and others involved in an allegation are treated fairly and given a reasonable chance to respond to substantive concerns. The journal avoids publicly presenting unverified allegations as established facts and communicates its findings responsibly.

  1. Possible Editorial Actions

After its assessment, the journal decides on appropriate action according to the evidence, the severity of the concern, and the implications for the integrity of the publication. Possible actions are:

8.1. No Further Action

If the allegation is not substantiated, or the evidence does not justify further action, the case may be closed.

8.2. Correction

If an article contains an error that can be fixed without invalidating its main findings or conclusions, the journal may publish a formal correction in line with its Correction and Retraction Policy.

8.3. Expression of Concern

If credible concerns remain unresolved and the reliability of an article may be affected, the journal may publish an Expression of Concern while further information or investigation is pending.

8.4. Retraction

If the evidence shows that an article has seriously unreliable findings, substantial plagiarism, fabricated or falsified data, or other grave violations that undermine its integrity, the journal may retract it. Retractions follow the journal's Correction and Retraction Policy and relevant publication ethics guidance.

8.5. Rejection or Suspension of a Manuscript

For manuscripts still under editorial consideration, the journal may suspend the review process, ask for more information, or reject the submission when serious ethical concerns are substantiated or cannot be adequately resolved.

8.6. Other Appropriate Measures

Depending on the circumstances, the journal may request additional disclosures, correct authorship information where justified, notify relevant parties, or take other proportionate steps consistent with its editorial policies.

Every action is based on the circumstances and evidence of the individual case.

  1. Appeals

Authors or other directly affected parties may appeal an editorial decision if they believe it rested on incomplete information, a misreading of the evidence, or a procedural irregularity. An appeal should explain the grounds for reconsideration and include relevant supporting documentation.

The Editor-in-Chief, or an independent editorial representative where needed to avoid a conflict of interest, reviews the appeal. The journal may seek independent expert advice and may uphold, modify, or reconsider its decision following the review.

  1. Responsibilities of Authors, Editors, and Reviewers

Authors are expected to keep accurate research records, report their findings honestly, disclose relevant conflicts of interest, meet authorship requirements, and cooperate reasonably with legitimate editorial inquiries.

Editors are responsible for assessing allegations impartially, maintaining appropriate confidentiality, avoiding conflicts of interest, and taking proportionate action based on the available evidence.

Reviewers who notice credible concerns about originality, data integrity, research ethics, or possible misconduct should report them confidentially to the editorial team, with supporting information where possible. Reviewers should not carry out their own investigations or publicly reveal unverified allegations arising from confidential peer review.

  1. Relationship with Other Journal Policies

This policy should be read together with the journal's:

  • Publication Ethics Policy
  • Authorship Criteria Policy
  • Conflict of Interest Policy
  • Peer Review Policy
  • Correction and Retraction Policy
  • Post-Publication Policy
  • Artificial Intelligence Use Policy, where applicable

Together these policies support the journal's commitment to responsible research conduct, transparent editorial decisions, and the preservation of the scholarly record.

  1. Policy Review

The journal may review and update this policy from time to time to reflect developments in publication ethics, research integrity, and recognized publishing standards. Any material changes will be posted on the journal's official website.

Editorial Contact

E-Jurnal Manajemen TSM

Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi Trisakti

Jakarta, Indonesia

Website: https://jurnaltsm.id/index.php/EJMTSM

Email: ejmtsm@tsm.ac.id

 

Reports about suspected research misconduct should be submitted to the Editorial Office of E-Jurnal Akuntansi TSM using the official contact details on the journal's website.