PLAGIARISM AND RESEARCH INTEGRITY POLICY

Plagiarism and Research Integrity Policy

---

1. Definition of Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the presentation of the words, ideas, data, arguments, images, results, or creative work of another person as one’s own, without giving credit and without proper citation, quotation, or the permission that is required. Plagiarism may be intentional, or it may result from careless attribution. In both cases it is unacceptable. Authors must identify and acknowledge all the sources that they use.

---

2. Forms of Plagiarism

Plagiarism can take many forms. The list below is not exhaustive.

Form	Description
Direct plagiarism	Copying text word for word without quotation marks and without a citation.
Paraphrasing without attribution	Rewording the work of someone else without giving credit.
Mosaic or patchwork plagiarism	Combining material from one or more sources, or changing it slightly, without acknowledgment.
Unattributed ideas	Using the theories, ideas, or interpretations of others without credit.
Improper use of data	Using data, statistics, or results without citing the source.
Improper use of protected material	Using figures, images, tables, maps, questionnaires, tests, scales, source code, designs, or other instruments without attribution or without the permission that is required.
Quotation misrepresentation	Presenting quoted material without clearly marking it as a quotation.
Source misrepresentation	Giving citations that are inaccurate or misleading.
Translation plagiarism	Translating text, for example from English into Indonesian or the reverse, and presenting it as original work without attribution.
Unauthorized authorship	Submitting work that was written by someone else, including work from paid writing services.
Inappropriate text recycling	Reusing one’s own published text without disclosure and citation.

---

3. Text Recycling, Articles Based on Theses, and Redundant Publication

Authors must disclose and cite their own earlier work. Substantial duplication of an earlier publication may be treated as inappropriate text recycling or as redundant publication. Limited overlap, such as a standard description of a method, may be acceptable. In judging an overlap, the editors consider the following factors.

Factor	What the editors consider
Amount	How much of the text overlaps with the earlier work.
Location	In which part of the manuscript the overlap occurs.
Context	The setting in which the overlapping text is used.
Attribution	Whether the earlier work is disclosed and cited.
Necessity	Whether the overlap is hard to avoid, for example in a standard description of a method.
Significance	How important the overlapping content is for the contribution of the manuscript.

An article that is based on a thesis or a dissertation should say so, for example in the Acknowledgments, and it must be rewritten as an article and not copied from the thesis. Submitting the same manuscript to another journal at the same time is prohibited.

---

4. Similarity and Plagiarism Screening

All manuscripts undergo an editorial screening for originality with the tools Turnitin and Plagiarism Checker X. A similarity percentage is only a screening signal and is never proof of plagiarism. An editor or an authorized member of the editorial staff reviews each report and considers the source, the amount, the location, and the nature of the matching text, together with its attribution and its context.

Matches that are usually acceptable include reference lists, text that is correctly quoted, common terminology, standard statements of methods, names of institutions, and legitimate references to earlier publications.

Similarity indicator

A low level of similarity is normally expected. A similarity of about 15 percent or higher may lead to an additional examination of the manuscript by the editors.

---

5. Other Forms of Research Misconduct

The journal also acts on the following forms of research misconduct. They are handled under the policies on Publication Ethics and Allegations of Misconduct.

No.	Form of misconduct
1	Fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation of data, including data from experiments, observations, and participants.
2	Manipulation or duplication of figures or images.
3	Fabricated or falsified references and DOIs.
4	Manipulation of citations.
5	Undisclosed duplicate or redundant publication.
6	Inappropriate authorship practices. See Authorship and Contributorship.
7	Manipulation of the peer review process.
8	Deliberate misrepresentation of methods, ethical permission and consent, participants, findings, or sources.

---

6. Editorial Screening Procedure

The screening of a manuscript follows the four steps below. The review itself is described on the Peer Review Process page.

Step	Stage	Description
1	Screening	The manuscript is screened with similarity and integrity tools.
2	Human assessment	An editor assesses the matching passages and their sources.
3	Clarification	The authors may explain the matches, correct the manuscript, add citations, rewrite passages, or provide documentation.
4	Editorial decision	The editors make a decision that is proportionate to the seriousness of the concern.

---

7. Action Before Publication

When a concern is found before a manuscript is published, the editors may take one or more of the following actions.

No.	Possible action
1	Request clarification from the authors.
2	Request corrected citations or attribution.
3	Require the rewriting or the revision of overlapping material.
4	Request data, permissions, or supporting documents.
5	Pause the editorial evaluation while the concern is examined.
6	Reject the manuscript in the case of substantial plagiarism, duplication, fabrication, falsification, or other serious misconduct.

---

8. Action After Publication

When a concern is found after an article has been published, the actions follow the policy on Correction and Retraction. They may include the following.

No.	Action	When it is used
1	Correction or corrigendum	An error or an omission in the published article needs to be corrected.
2	Expression of concern	An investigation has not been resolved yet.
3	Retraction	The published record is substantially unreliable, or serious misconduct has been proven.
4	Notification	The relevant institutions or authorities are informed.
5	Other steps	Any other step that is proportionate to the concern.

---

Automated Screening and Human Oversight

Automated tools support the editors, but they do not decide whether misconduct has occurred. Qualified editors make the final decisions on plagiarism, inappropriate reuse of text, fabricated references, concerns about the use of AI, and other forms of misconduct.

---

Screening Policy Summary

Item	Policy
Plagiarism screening	Yes, for all manuscripts
Screening tools	Turnitin and Plagiarism Checker X
Similarity indicator	About 15 percent or higher may lead to an additional review
Automatic rejection based on a percentage	No
Final assessment	Human editorial evaluation

---

Our Commitment

---