Allegation of Research Misconduct

1. Policy Statement

Media Bisnis (MB), published by Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi Trisakti, is committed to upholding the highest standards of research integrity, academic honesty, and responsible scholarly publishing.

MB takes allegations of research misconduct seriously and is committed to handling all concerns fairly, objectively, confidentially, and in a timely manner. The journal seeks to ensure that published research is trustworthy and that allegations are assessed through a transparent and evidence-based process.

This policy is informed by the principles of responsible research conduct and relevant recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

MB does not presume that an allegation constitutes proof of misconduct. All allegations will be assessed carefully, and appropriate action will be taken based on the available evidence and the circumstances of each case.

2. Definition and Types of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct refers to conduct that violates accepted standards of research integrity or publication ethics and may compromise the reliability, originality, or credibility of scholarly work.

Allegations covered by this policy include, but are not limited to, the following.

2.1. Data Fabrication and Falsification

* *Data fabrication:* Making up data, observations, research participants, or experimental results and presenting them as genuine.
* *Data falsification:* Manipulating research materials, procedures, data, analyses, or results in a manner that misrepresents the research findings.

2.2. Plagiarism

Plagiarism involves using another person's ideas, words, data, methods, figures, tables, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment.

It may include substantial unattributed copying, inappropriate paraphrasing, or presenting another person's work as one's own.

2.3. Duplicate or Redundant Publication

Duplicate or redundant publication occurs when substantially overlapping research findings or content are published more than once without appropriate disclosure or justification.

This may include submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously in violation of applicable editorial requirements.

2.4. Authorship Misconduct

Authorship misconduct may include:

* Listing individuals as authors without their knowledge or consent.
* Excluding individuals who made qualifying contributions.
* Misrepresenting the contributions of authors.
* Unauthorized changes to the author list.
* Guest, gift, or ghost authorship that misrepresents actual contributions.

2.5. Citation Manipulation

Citation manipulation includes inappropriate practices intended to inflate citation counts or distort the scholarly record, such as coercive citation, irrelevant citation requests, or systematic inclusion of citations without a legitimate scholarly basis.

2.6. Manipulation of the Peer-Review Process

This may include impersonating reviewers, submitting fraudulent reviewer identities, manipulating reviewer recommendations, or engaging in other practices intended to compromise the independence or integrity of peer review.

2.7. Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest

Failure to disclose relevant financial, personal, professional, or institutional interests may constitute 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) may include fabricating research data or references, misrepresenting the research process, concealing AI use when disclosure is required by journal policy, or using AI tools in ways that compromise research integrity.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the content they submit and publish.

2.9. Other Ethical Violations

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

Honest errors, methodological disagreements, or differences in scholarly interpretation do not automatically constitute research misconduct. Such cases will be evaluated according to their nature and supporting evidence.

3. Reporting Allegations

MB encourages 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 submitted to the MB Editorial through the official contact information provided on the journal's website.

Where possible, a report should include:

1. The title and authors of the manuscript or published article.
2. The article's DOI or URL, if available.
3. A clear description of the suspected misconduct.
4. Relevant supporting evidence, such as documents, data, publication comparisons, or other verifiable information.
5. The reporting party's contact information, where appropriate.

MB may consider anonymous reports when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information to warrant assessment.

The journal will not automatically accept an allegation as true merely because it has been reported. Reports will be evaluated on their merits and the evidence available.

4. Preliminary Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated editorial representative will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the scope of this policy and whether sufficient information exists to justify further examination.

The preliminary assessment may include:

Reviewing the allegation and supporting evidence.
Examining the relevant manuscript or published article.
Checking available publication records, data, references, or other relevant materials.
Requesting clarification or additional documentation from the reporting party, where appropriate.
Consulting an independent editorial representative or subject-matter expert when necessary.

If the allegation is unsupported, falls outside the scope of research misconduct, or can be resolved through a routine editorial clarification, the journal may close the matter or take an appropriate alternative action.

If credible concerns remain, MB may proceed with a more detailed assessment.

5. Investigation and Communication with Authors

When an allegation warrants further investigation, MB will seek to establish the relevant facts through a fair and impartial process.

The journal may contact the corresponding author and other relevant authors to request an explanation, supporting data, original records, research documentation, or other information necessary to assess the concern.

Authors will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations and provide relevant evidence.

Where appropriate, MB may consult independent experts, editors, reviewers, research institutions, employers, or other relevant authorities.

The scope and depth of the investigation will depend on the nature and seriousness of the allegation, the available evidence, and the journal's ability to verify the relevant facts.

MB recognizes that some matters, particularly allegations involving research data, institutional conduct, or complex research practices, may require investigation by the authors' institutions or other competent bodies.

The journal will not claim to have established misconduct solely on the basis of an allegation or an author's failure to respond.

6. Referral to Institutions and Relevant Authorities

When an allegation requires access to information or investigative authority beyond the journal's capacity, MB may refer the matter to the relevant academic institution, research organization, employer, funding body, or other competent authority.

Such referral may be appropriate in cases involving suspected data fabrication, data falsification, serious plagiarism, unethical research conduct, or other substantial concerns about research integrity.

MB may request that the relevant institution investigate the matter and communicate its findings to the journal, where appropriate.

The journal will consider the available evidence and any relevant institutional findings when determining whether editorial action is necessary.

Institutional referral does not prevent MB from taking appropriate editorial measures to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

7. Confidentiality and Protection of Parties

MB will handle allegations and related communications confidentially to the extent reasonably possible and consistent with a fair assessment, applicable obligations, and the need to investigate the matter.

Information will be shared only with individuals who reasonably need it for the assessment or investigation.

The journal will take reasonable steps to protect individuals who raise concerns in good faith from inappropriate retaliation.

At the same time, authors and other individuals involved in an allegation will be treated fairly and will have a reasonable opportunity to respond to substantive concerns.

MB will avoid publicly presenting unverified allegations as established facts and will communicate findings responsibly.

8. Possible Editorial Actions

Following its assessment, MB will determine the appropriate action based on the evidence, the severity of the concern, and its implications for the integrity of the publication.

Possible actions include the following.

8.1. No Further Action

If the allegation is not substantiated or the available evidence does not justify further action, the journal may close the case.

8.2. Correction

If an article contains an error that can be corrected without invalidating its principal findings or conclusions, MB may publish a formal correction in accordance 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, MB may publish an Expression of Concern while additional information or investigation is pending.

8.4. Retraction

If the evidence establishes that an article contains seriously unreliable findings, substantial plagiarism, fabricated or falsified data, or other serious violations that undermine its integrity, MB may retract the article.

Retractions will be handled in accordance with 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, MB may suspend the review process, request additional 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, revise authorship information where justified, notify relevant parties, or take other proportionate actions consistent with its editorial policies.

Any action will be based on the circumstances and evidence of the individual case.

9. Appeals

Authors or other directly affected parties may submit an appeal if they believe that an editorial decision was based on incomplete information, a misunderstanding of the evidence, or a procedural irregularity.

Appeals should provide a clear explanation of the grounds for reconsideration and include relevant supporting documentation.

The Editor-in-Chief or an independent editorial representative, where necessary to avoid a conflict of interest, will review the appeal.

MB may seek independent expert advice when appropriate. The journal may uphold, modify, or reconsider its decision based on the outcome of the review.

10. Responsibilities of Authors, Editors, and Reviewers

Authors

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

Editors

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

Reviewers

Reviewers who identify credible concerns regarding originality, data integrity, research ethics, or other potential misconduct should report those concerns confidentially to the editorial team and provide relevant supporting information where possible.

Reviewers should not independently conduct investigations or publicly disclose unverified allegations arising from confidential peer review.

11. Relationship with Other Journal Policies

This policy should be read in conjunction with MB'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.

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

12. Policy Review

MB may review and update this policy periodically to reflect developments in publication ethics, research integrity, and recognized scholarly publishing standards.

Any material changes will be published on the journal's official website.

Editorial Contact

Media Bisnis
Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi Trisakti
Jakarta, Indonesia

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

Reports concerning suspected research misconduct should be submitted to the MB Editorial using the official contact information provided on the journal's website.