Allegations of Misconduct

1. Introduction and Policy Commitment

The Andalasian International Journal of Agriculture and Natural Sciences (AIJANS) is committed to maintaining the integrity, reliability, transparency, and accountability of scholarly research and publication.

AIJANS takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously, whether the concerns arise before publication, during editorial assessment and peer review, or after an article has been published.

The journal recognizes its responsibility to assess credible concerns, protect the integrity of the scholarly record, and take appropriate editorial action. At the same time, AIJANS acknowledges that formal investigations into research misconduct may fall within the authority of research institutions, employers, funding organizations, or other competent bodies.

This policy establishes procedures for receiving, assessing, investigating, referring, and resolving allegations of research or publication misconduct.

AIJANS follows relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, Version 5.

2. Scope of the Policy

This policy applies to allegations concerning:

Manuscripts submitted to AIJANS.
Manuscripts undergoing editorial assessment or peer review.
Accepted manuscripts awaiting publication.
Articles already published by AIJANS.
Research data, images, figures, tables, and supplementary materials associated with submitted or published research.
Conduct by authors, reviewers, editors, editorial staff, or other individuals involved in the journal's publication process.
Actions that may compromise the reliability of research findings or the integrity of editorial and peer-review procedures.

The policy applies regardless of an individual's institutional affiliation, academic position, nationality, or professional standing.

Allegations involving dissatisfaction with an editorial decision, without an accompanying concern about misconduct, are ordinarily addressed under the journal's Complaints and Appeals policy.

3. Definition and Categories of Misconduct

Research or publication misconduct includes conduct that compromises, or may reasonably compromise, the integrity of research, scholarly reporting, editorial evaluation, or publication.

Examples include, but are not limited to, the following.

3.1 Plagiarism

Presenting another person's words, ideas, data, images, results, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment.

This may include unauthorized reproduction, unattributed paraphrasing, and other forms of intellectual misappropriation.

3.2 Fabrication

Inventing research data, observations, experiments, findings, or results and presenting them as genuine.

3.3 Falsification

Manipulating research materials, equipment, procedures, data, images, or results, or selectively omitting relevant information in a manner that misrepresents the research.

3.4 Authorship Misconduct

Misrepresenting authorship or contributions, including inappropriate exclusion or inclusion of authors, unauthorized changes in authorship, or submission without the required agreement of contributors.

3.5 Redundant or Duplicate Publication

Submitting or publishing substantially overlapping work without appropriate disclosure, acknowledgment, or justification.

Previously disseminated preprints and legitimate secondary publications must be assessed according to the journal's applicable policies rather than automatically treated as misconduct.

3.6 Citation Manipulation

Improperly influencing citations for purposes unrelated to scholarly relevance, including coercive citation requests, coordinated citation manipulation, or the deliberate inclusion of irrelevant references to inflate citation metrics.

3.7 Peer-Review Manipulation

Attempting to compromise peer-review independence or integrity through activities such as providing fabricated reviewer identities, using unauthorized reviewer accounts, submitting fraudulent reviews, or coordinating inappropriate influence over reviewer recommendations.

3.8 Undisclosed Competing Interests

Failing to disclose financial, professional, institutional, personal, or other relationships that could reasonably influence, or appear to influence, the conduct, evaluation, or reporting of research.

3.9 Research Ethics Violations

Conducting or reporting research in ways that violate applicable ethical requirements, including requirements concerning research involving humans, animals, identifiable information, or other ethically sensitive materials.

3.10 Misrepresentation of Research Approvals or Permissions

Submitting false or misleading information concerning ethical approval, informed consent, research permissions, institutional authorization, or required documentation.

3.11 Misuse of Artificial Intelligence

Using artificial intelligence or automated tools in ways that involve fabrication, falsification, misleading attribution, undisclosed generation where disclosure is required, or other violations of the journal's AI and publication ethics policies.

The use of AI tools is not automatically misconduct. Concerns must be assessed according to the nature of the activity, applicable journal requirements, available evidence, and its effects on research integrity.

3.12 Other Serious Publication Integrity Concerns

Other conduct that may undermine the reliability of scholarly publications, including systematic manipulation of the publication process or deliberate misrepresentation of research findings.

4. Who May Report Allegations

AIJANS accepts credible concerns from individuals or organizations with relevant information about possible research or publication misconduct.

Reports may be submitted by:

Authors and coauthors.
Peer reviewers.
Editors and Editorial Board members.
Readers and other researchers.
Research institutions and employers.
Funding organizations.
Research integrity officers.
Other individuals or organizations with relevant evidence.

Individuals do not need to be directly involved in the research or publication to raise a legitimate concern.

AIJANS also accepts anonymous reports when they provide sufficient specific information to permit a meaningful preliminary assessment.

Anonymous reports may be more difficult to investigate when clarification or additional supporting evidence cannot be obtained.

5. How to Submit an Allegation

Allegations should be submitted in writing to the AIJANS Editorial Office.

Email: aijans@unand.ac.id

To assist the assessment, reporters are encouraged to provide:

A clear description of the suspected misconduct or integrity concern.
The title, DOI, URL, or other identifying details of the manuscript or article concerned, where available.
An explanation of the specific information or findings being questioned.
Supporting documents, relevant correspondence, data comparisons, or other available evidence.
Relevant dates or circumstances that may assist the assessment.
Contact information for follow-up communication, unless the report is submitted anonymously.

Reporters should distinguish facts they have personally verified from interpretations, suspicions, or information received from other parties.

Supporting materials should be obtained and shared lawfully, without unauthorized disclosure of confidential or sensitive information.

AIJANS does not require a reporter to establish misconduct conclusively before submitting a concern. The purpose of reporting is to bring information to the journal's attention for appropriate assessment.

6. Initial Receipt and Preliminary Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or another appropriately authorized editor will conduct, or arrange, a preliminary assessment.

The initial assessment seeks to determine:

Whether the allegation concerns material submitted to or published by AIJANS.
Whether the concern falls within the scope of this policy.
Whether sufficient information is available to identify and assess the issue.
Whether the concern involves possible research misconduct, publication misconduct, an editorial dispute, or a technical or factual error.
Whether urgent action may be necessary to prevent further harm or protect the scholarly record.
Whether any person responsible for handling the case has a competing interest.
Whether the matter should be referred to an institution or another competent body.

The journal may request clarification or additional evidence when necessary.

An allegation will not be considered established merely because it has been submitted.

Where a report is clearly outside the journal's responsibility, the journal may explain the limitation and, when appropriate, direct the reporter toward a more suitable authority.

7. Independence and Conflicts of Interest

All allegations must be assessed impartially.

An editor or other individual with a significant actual, potential, or perceived competing interest must not exercise sole responsibility for assessing or deciding the matter.

If an allegation concerns an editor, reviewer, or member of the editorial team, the case must be assigned to an appropriately independent person who is not implicated in the concern.

If the allegation directly concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the journal's publisher should arrange an independent review through an appropriate qualified individual or institutional mechanism.

Individuals who are the subject of an allegation must not control the investigation or determination of the concern involving their own conduct.

Appropriate records should be maintained concerning any reassignment of responsibility and the reasons for doing so.

8. Fairness and the Opportunity to Respond

AIJANS is committed to treating all parties fairly and professionally throughout the assessment of misconduct allegations.

Where a credible allegation requires a response from the person concerned, the journal should communicate the relevant concerns in sufficient detail to permit a meaningful explanation, subject to necessary confidentiality and legal safeguards.

The individual or individuals concerned should be given a reasonable opportunity to:

Respond to the specific concerns raised.
Provide explanations or clarifications.
Submit relevant supporting evidence.
Identify possible factual misunderstandings.
Disclose additional information that may assist the assessment.

Responses must be evaluated impartially and in relation to the available evidence.

A failure to respond may be considered when determining an appropriate editorial course of action, but it does not, by itself, establish misconduct.

9. Confidentiality and Protection of Reporters

AIJANS recognizes the importance of protecting individuals who raise genuine concerns about research and publication integrity.

Reports and related correspondence will be handled with appropriate confidentiality, subject to the requirements of fair assessment, necessary investigation, and applicable law.

The identity of a reporter should not be disclosed unnecessarily.

However, absolute anonymity or confidentiality cannot be guaranteed where disclosure is legally required or reasonably necessary for an appropriate investigation or fair response.

AIJANS does not tolerate retaliation within its editorial processes against individuals who raise concerns honestly and in good faith.

Retaliatory conduct may include inappropriate editorial discrimination, intimidation, or misuse of confidential information.

At the same time, individuals must not knowingly submit fabricated evidence or deliberately false allegations.

The fact that an allegation is not substantiated does not automatically mean that the report was made maliciously or in bad faith.

10. Assessment and Investigation Procedures

The procedures used to assess an allegation will depend on the nature, seriousness, complexity, and available evidence of the concern.

Where appropriate, AIJANS may undertake the following actions:

Examine the manuscript, published article, figures, tables, supplementary material, or relevant editorial records.
Review supporting documentation submitted by the reporter.
Request explanations and relevant evidence from the authors or other individuals concerned.
Consult independent subject specialists or methodological experts when necessary.
Seek clarification concerning research data, images, permissions, ethical approval, or other relevant documentation.
Contact an author-affiliated institution or another competent body when formal investigation is required.
Coordinate with other journals or publishers when the concern affects multiple publications.
Determine whether editorial action is necessary to protect the scholarly record.

AIJANS may evaluate the reliability of published content and compliance with its editorial policies. However, the journal does not claim to possess the same investigatory authority as an employer, research institution, or regulatory body.

The journal may not have access to original laboratory records, research facilities, personnel records, or other materials necessary to establish whether formal research misconduct occurred.

Where such evidence is essential, the journal should seek cooperation from an appropriate institution or competent authority.

11. Cooperation With Research Institutions

AIJANS recognizes that research institutions and employers may have primary responsibility for formal investigations into alleged research misconduct.

When appropriate, the journal may contact relevant institutions to:

Request confirmation or clarification concerning research integrity concerns.
Provide information relevant to a legitimate investigation.
Ask whether an institutional investigation has been initiated or completed.
Request information concerning findings that may affect the reliability of a published article.
Coordinate appropriate corrective action concerning the scholarly record.

Any communication with institutions must be proportionate, factual, and consistent with applicable confidentiality and data protection obligations.

AIJANS should distinguish between allegations, evidence, institutional findings, and editorial judgments.

The journal may take appropriate editorial action to protect the scholarly record when sufficient evidence exists, even when a formal institutional finding is unavailable, provided that the action is justified and follows applicable procedures.

12. Handling Allegations Before Publication

If an allegation arises while a manuscript is under editorial assessment, peer review, revision, or production, the journal will determine whether processing should continue, be paused, or be terminated.

Depending on the circumstances, appropriate actions may include:

Requesting clarification from the authors.
Obtaining additional supporting documentation.
Seeking independent expert advice.
Temporarily suspending editorial consideration while a material concern is assessed.
Referring a serious allegation to an appropriate research institution.
Rejecting a manuscript where the available evidence demonstrates that the submission fails to meet the journal's scholarly or ethical requirements.

The journal should not automatically reject a manuscript solely because an allegation has been submitted.

The decision must be based on the available evidence, the nature of the concern, and the journal's editorial responsibilities.

Where the allegation remains unresolved, the Editor-in-Chief may determine that publication should not proceed until the concern has been adequately addressed.

13. Handling Allegations After Publication

AIJANS will assess credible concerns involving published articles, regardless of when the concerns are raised.

Post-publication concerns may arise from readers, authors, researchers, institutions, reviewers, or other parties.

The journal may examine whether the concern affects:

The reliability of the reported findings.
The accuracy of the published record.
The validity of research methods or data.
The ethical or legal basis of the research.
Authorship and contributor accountability.
The integrity of peer review or editorial assessment.

Where a material concern is identified, the journal will determine whether a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or another appropriate action is warranted.

Post-publication decisions must be guided by the reliability of the scholarly record and the applicable criteria established in the journal's Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern policy.

A finding of misconduct is not always required before an article can be corrected or retracted. Conversely, an allegation alone is not sufficient to justify retraction.

14. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

AIJANS distinguishes among editorial actions according to the nature and seriousness of the identified problem.

14.1 Correction

A correction may be appropriate when an error or omission affects the published record but does not invalidate the article's principal findings or conclusions.

14.2 Expression of Concern

An expression of concern may be appropriate when there are substantial unresolved concerns about the reliability or integrity of a published article and readers should be informed while further clarification or investigation is pending.

14.3 Retraction

A retraction may be appropriate when the available evidence establishes that the findings are unreliable, the article involves serious publication integrity problems, or other grounds for retraction are met.

Retractions are intended primarily to correct the scholarly record and alert readers to unreliable or otherwise seriously problematic publications. They are not, in themselves, a disciplinary punishment.

14.4 Editorial Notices

Editorial notices must clearly identify the affected article and provide an appropriate explanation for the action taken.

Where applicable, notices should be linked to the original article and preserve the transparency and traceability of the scholarly record.

Detailed criteria and procedures are governed by the journal's separate Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern policy.

15. Communication of Findings and Decisions

AIJANS will communicate the outcome of its assessment to the relevant parties as appropriate, taking into account confidentiality, fairness, and legal obligations.

Communications may include:

An acknowledgment that the concern has been received.
A request for additional information.
Notification that the matter has been referred for further assessment.
Notification of a relevant editorial decision.
Information about a published correction, expression of concern, or retraction.
An explanation that the journal is unable to determine the allegation conclusively from the available evidence.

The journal may be unable to disclose confidential investigation records, personal information, reviewer identities, or other restricted material.

Where an allegation is not substantiated, AIJANS should avoid publishing unnecessary information that could unfairly damage the reputation of the individuals concerned.

16. Possible Outcomes

Following appropriate assessment, the journal may reach one or more of the following outcomes:

No further action: The available information does not establish a concern requiring editorial intervention.
Clarification: An explanation resolves the concern without requiring a change to the published record.
Editorial action before publication: The manuscript is revised, its assessment is suspended, or it is rejected in accordance with applicable editorial standards.
Correction: A published error or omission is formally corrected.
Expression of concern: Readers are informed of significant unresolved concerns.
Retraction: A published article is retracted when the applicable criteria are met.
Institutional referral: The matter is referred to an appropriate institution or competent authority.
Other proportionate action: Additional steps are taken where justified by the evidence and relevant policies.

The outcome must be proportionate to the established facts and the journal's responsibilities.

The journal must not represent an allegation as an established finding without sufficient supporting evidence.

17. Recordkeeping and Documentation

AIJANS will maintain appropriate records of misconduct concerns and relevant editorial actions.

Records may include:

The original allegation and supporting material.
Relevant correspondence.
Requests for clarification and responses received.
Information considered during assessment.
Records of conflicts of interest and reassignment of responsibility.
Relevant institutional communications.
The rationale for editorial decisions.
Any resulting correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

Access to such records must be restricted according to legitimate editorial responsibilities and applicable data protection requirements.

Records should be retained according to the journal's applicable recordkeeping and privacy arrangements.

18. Timelines and Progress of Investigations

AIJANS aims to assess allegations without unnecessary delay.

However, the time required to resolve a concern may vary depending on its complexity, the availability of evidence, the responsiveness of the parties involved, and whether an institutional investigation is necessary.

Where practical, the journal should acknowledge reports, inform relevant parties when additional information is needed, and provide appropriate progress information when a matter remains unresolved for an extended period.

The journal will not promise a fixed completion date when the investigation depends on external institutions or other circumstances beyond its control.

Urgent concerns that may require prompt editorial action will be prioritized according to their potential effect on the integrity of the scholarly record.

19. Appeals and Complaints About the Handling of Allegations

Individuals who believe that an allegation has been handled unfairly or contrary to the journal's established procedures may raise a complaint through the journal's Complaints and Appeals process.

Such requests should explain the alleged procedural deficiency or provide relevant new evidence.

Disagreement with an editorial conclusion does not automatically establish procedural misconduct.

Where a complaint concerns the conduct of the Editor-in-Chief or another person responsible for the original decision, the complaint should be considered through an appropriately independent review arrangement.

The journal may reconsider a matter when material new evidence becomes available or when a substantial procedural error is identified.

20. Coordination With Other Journal Policies

This policy should be read together with the journal's related publication and editorial policies, including:

Publication Ethics.
Authorship and Contributorship.
Plagiarism Policy.
Competing Interests Policy.
Peer Review Process and Editorial Assessment.
Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern.
Complaints and Appeals.
Governance Policy.
Privacy Statement.

Where an allegation involves a matter governed by a more specific policy, AIJANS will apply the relevant procedures consistently while preserving the principles of impartiality, confidentiality, proportionality, and accountability.

21. Contact Information

Allegations concerning research or publication misconduct may be submitted to:

AIJANS Editorial Office
Andalasian International Journal of Agriculture and Natural Sciences (AIJANS)
Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat (LPPM)
Universitas Andalas
Kampus Limau Manis, Padang, West Sumatra, Indonesia
Email: aijans@unand.ac.id

For clarity, the suggested email subject is:

Research or Publication Integrity Concern – AIJANS

22. Policy Review and References

AIJANS may periodically review this policy to reflect developments in research integrity, scholarly publishing standards, applicable laws, and editorial practice.

This policy is informed by the following guidance:

Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, Version 5, developed by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME.
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), guidance on research and publication misconduct.
COPE Guidelines: Cooperation Between Research Institutions and Journals on Research Integrity and Publication Misconduct Cases.