Allegations of Research Misconduct

Allegations of Research Misconduct

The Journal of Islamic Economics and Business (JIEB) is committed to maintaining research integrity, publication ethics, and responsible scholarly communication. The journal takes allegations of research or publication misconduct seriously and seeks to handle them fairly, confidentially, consistently, and in accordance with applicable ethical standards.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and other parties involved in the journal's publication process. It covers concerns arising during manuscript submission, peer review, editorial decision-making, and after publication. An allegation is not, by itself, proof of misconduct; each case must be assessed on the basis of the available evidence and the circumstances involved.

1. Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

Research or publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

  • Plagiarism: Using another person's words, ideas, data, methods, or other intellectual work without appropriate acknowledgment.
  • Fabrication: Inventing research data, results, participants, or other research information and presenting it as genuine.
  • Falsification: Manipulating research materials, procedures, data, images, or results in ways that misrepresent the research.
  • Duplicate or redundant publication: Publishing substantially overlapping work without appropriate disclosure or justification.
  • Undisclosed overlapping submissions: Submitting the same or substantially similar manuscript to more than one journal at the same time without appropriate disclosure.
  • Authorship misconduct: Inappropriately assigning, omitting, or misrepresenting authorship or contributor roles.
  • Manipulation of peer review: Attempting to compromise the integrity of peer review through deception, fabricated reviewer identities, undisclosed interference, or other improper conduct.
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest: Failing to disclose relevant relationships or interests that could improperly influence research, peer review, or editorial decisions.
  • Research ethics violations: Providing false or misleading information about ethical approval, informed consent, research participants, permissions, or compliance with applicable research requirements.
  • Misuse of generative AI or other tools: Using such tools in ways that violate journal policy, including presenting fabricated references or information as genuine, misrepresenting authorship, or making false declarations about tool use.
  • Other serious ethical breaches: Conduct that undermines the reliability, transparency, or integrity of research or the scholarly publication process.

Honest errors, differences of scholarly interpretation, or technical issues do not automatically constitute misconduct. Their significance must be assessed in context, including whether there is evidence of intentional, reckless, or otherwise serious inappropriate conduct.

2. Reporting Suspected Misconduct

Anyone with a reasonable concern about possible research or publication misconduct in a manuscript submitted to or an article published by JIEB may report the concern to the editorial office. Reports should be made in good faith and provide enough information to permit an initial assessment.

Where possible, a report should include:

  • The title or identifying details of the manuscript or published article.
  • The names of the relevant authors or other parties, if known.
  • A clear description of the suspected misconduct and the reasons for concern.
  • Supporting evidence, such as relevant publications, documents, data, or correspondence.

Reports may be submitted to jieb@uinsgd.ac.id. Anonymous reports may be considered when they contain sufficient information or evidence for an initial assessment. The journal may request additional information when necessary.

3. Initial Assessment and Examination

The editorial team will assess whether the concern falls within the journal's responsibility and whether sufficient information is available for further examination. The initial assessment may include reviewing the submitted evidence, examining relevant publications or records, checking source attribution or data where appropriate, and seeking clarification from relevant parties.

Where further examination is warranted, the journal may request a written response or supporting documentation from the author or other relevant party. The nature and scope of the examination will depend on the type and seriousness of the allegation and the evidence available.

Any editor with an actual or potential conflict of interest in the matter must disclose it and should not lead the assessment. Where necessary, an independent editor, qualified adviser, or appropriate institutional representative may be consulted. The journal may seek specialist advice when a concern falls outside its expertise.

4. Fairness, Confidentiality, and Protection from Retaliation

JIEB seeks to handle allegations impartially and confidentially to the extent reasonably possible. Information will be shared only with those who need it to assess or resolve the concern, subject to applicable legal, institutional, and ethical requirements.

The person against whom an allegation is made should be given an appropriate opportunity to respond to the concerns before a conclusion is reached, where this is consistent with the circumstances and the integrity of the examination. The journal will consider relevant explanations and evidence before determining any editorial action.

JIEB seeks to avoid premature conclusions, unnecessary disclosure of personal information, and retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith. Knowingly false or malicious allegations may be considered separately where there is adequate evidence to support such a concern.

5. Consultation with Institutions and Other Bodies

Some allegations require access to original research records, institutional authority, or investigative procedures beyond the journal's capacity. In such cases, JIEB may contact or refer the matter to the relevant author's institution, research organization, funder, or another appropriate body, where warranted and appropriate.

The journal's editorial examination does not replace a formal institutional investigation. JIEB will consider credible information received from institutions or other competent bodies when deciding what editorial action, if any, is appropriate for a submitted manuscript or published article.

6. Possible Editorial Actions

Any action taken will depend on the nature, seriousness, and evidential basis of the concern. Depending on the circumstances, possible actions may include:

  • Requesting clarification, supporting documents, or appropriate corrections.
  • Returning a manuscript for revision when the concern can appropriately be resolved through revision.
  • Rejecting a manuscript that does not meet the journal's ethical or scholarly requirements.
  • Pausing editorial consideration while a significant concern is being assessed.
  • Publishing a correction, expression of concern, or retraction when justified for an already published article.
  • Informing an author's institution, research organization, funder, or other appropriate body when warranted.
  • Taking other proportionate editorial measures consistent with the evidence and the journal's policies.

Actions are not automatic penalties. The journal will consider the evidence, the response from relevant parties, the potential effect on the integrity of the scholarly record, and the applicable policies. Significant decisions and their rationale should be documented.

7. Concerns Relating to Published Articles

When an allegation concerns an article already published by JIEB, the journal will assess whether the concern affects the article's accuracy, reliability, ethical standing, or integrity. The journal may seek further information from the authors, institutions, or other relevant sources as appropriate.

Depending on the findings, the journal may take no further action, publish a correction, issue an expression of concern, or retract the article. Any public notice will explain the reason for the action as clearly as appropriate, identify the affected publication, and maintain a transparent connection with the original article where technically possible.

Further details are provided in the Retraction and Corrections Policy and the journal's Post-Publication Discussion and Correspondence Policy.

8. Responsibilities of Authors, Reviewers, and Editors

Authors are expected to provide accurate information, maintain relevant research records, acknowledge sources appropriately, disclose relevant conflicts of interest and overlapping publications, cooperate with reasonable editorial inquiries, and correct significant errors when necessary.

Reviewers are expected to report credible concerns about originality, research integrity, or ethical compliance to the editorial team, while maintaining confidentiality and avoiding unsupported allegations.

Editors are expected to assess concerns impartially, manage conflicts of interest, protect confidential information, provide relevant parties with a fair opportunity to respond where appropriate, and base editorial actions on the available evidence and applicable ethical standards.

9. Relationship to Other JIEB Policies

This policy should be read together with the following related policies:

10. Policy Review

JIEB may review and update this policy when necessary to reflect developments in publication ethics, applicable regulations, and recognized scholarly publishing standards. Any revision should be implemented consistently with the journal's editorial responsibilities and publication practices.

Contact

Questions or reports concerning suspected research or publication misconduct may be sent to:

Editorial Office — Journal of Islamic Economics and Business (JIEB)
Email: jieb@uinsgd.ac.id
Publisher: Faculty of Islamic Economics and Business, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, Indonesia