Allegations of Research Misconduct Policy
Allegations of Research Misconduct Policy
Fair, confidential, and evidence-based assessment of concerns affecting the reliability of scientific research.
Jurnal Kimia VALENSI, published by the Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science and Technology, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, is committed to the originality, authenticity, ethical conduct, and scientific reliability of research submitted to and published by the journal.
The journal examines credible concerns arising before or after publication in accordance with its Publication Ethics and relevant recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
An allegation is not proof of misconduct. Editorial assessments must distinguish intentional wrongdoing from honest error, reasonable scientific disagreement, methodological limitations, and unsubstantiated accusations.
1. Definition and Scope of Research Misconduct
Concerns that may require editorial examination include, but are not limited to:
Inventing experimental observations, analytical measurements, spectra, chromatograms, simulation outputs, sample results, or other research data.
Manipulating laboratory records, instrument readings, images, spectra, peak assignments, experimental conditions, or statistical analyses in a misleading manner.
Using another researcher's text, ideas, experimental procedures, chemical structures, figures, datasets, or findings without appropriate acknowledgment.
Simultaneous submission, substantial redundant publication, or inappropriate reuse of previously published data without clear disclosure.
Fabricated references, manipulated citations, false reviewer identities, compromised peer review, or unauthorized changes to editorial records.
Guest, ghost, purchased, coercive, or unauthorized authorship and false claims concerning research contributions.
Serious noncompliance with applicable human or animal research approval, informed consent, confidentiality, or responsible research requirements.
2. Reporting Allegations
Authors, reviewers, editors, readers, research institutions, and other individuals with credible concerns may submit a written report to the Editorial Office. The report should include:
- The manuscript title and submission number, or article title and DOI.
- A clear description of the suspected issue.
- Supporting evidence, relevant references, or available documentation.
- Contact details of the reporting person, where appropriate.
- Information concerning urgent ethical, confidentiality, or safety risks.
Anonymous concerns may be considered when sufficiently specific and supported by verifiable evidence. Unsupported speculation does not establish misconduct.
3. Editorial Assessment Procedure
The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor assesses whether the allegation is relevant, credible, and supported by sufficient initial information.
Editors may examine raw analytical data, laboratory records, original images, relevant publications, and other materials where appropriate and lawfully available.
Relevant authors are ordinarily given an appropriate opportunity to explain or respond to the concerns.
Independent specialists or relevant research institutions may be consulted when specialized analysis or formal investigation is required.
The journal evaluates the publication implications, determines appropriate editorial action, and documents the reasons for its decision.
Relevant parties are informed as appropriate, while necessary records are retained securely under applicable institutional requirements.
4. Cooperation with Research Institutions
Research institutions are generally responsible for conducting formal investigations into researcher behavior and imposing any applicable institutional sanctions. The journal may request institutional assistance when a concern involves laboratory records, ethics approvals, research supervision, or evidence beyond the journal's editorial authority.
The journal retains responsibility for deciding how substantiated concerns should affect submissions and the published scholarly record.
5. Editorial Actions
- Temporary suspension of editorial processing.
- Requests for clarification or original evidence.
- Additional independent assessment.
- Revision or correction where appropriate.
- Rejection when serious concerns are substantiated.
- Referral to an institution where necessary.
- No action when concerns are unsupported.
- Correction of significant but remediable errors.
- Expression of Concern for unresolved serious issues.
- Retraction for materially unreliable publications.
- Further editorial or institutional examination.
6. Confidentiality, Fairness, and Protection
- Reports and related evidence must be handled with appropriate confidentiality.
- Persons raising concerns in good faith should be protected from inappropriate retaliation.
- Authors must be given fair opportunities to respond where appropriate.
- Editors with relevant conflicts of interest must not handle the case.
- Unpublished research, confidential industrial information, and protected intellectual property must be safeguarded.
- Personal information and sensitive data from human or animal research must be handled responsibly.
- Public statements should avoid premature or unsupported accusations.
7. Responsibilities of Authors, Reviewers, and Editors
Authors: Maintain authentic research records, accurately report experimental procedures and results, cooperate with legitimate inquiries, and notify the journal of significant errors.
Reviewers: Report credible integrity concerns confidentially, provide evidence where possible, and avoid speculative accusations or conflicts of interest.
Editors: Assess concerns impartially, seek appropriate expertise, protect confidential records, document decisions, and implement proportionate editorial measures.
Jurnal Kimia VALENSI seeks to protect reliable scientific contributions, ensure fair treatment of all parties, and preserve public confidence in published chemical research.
