ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT

This policy explains how Jurnal Manajemen receives and assesses concerns about research integrity or publication ethics, whether the concern is raised before or after publication. A report starts an assessment. It does not by itself establish that misconduct has happened.

ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT AT A GLANCE
What it covers	Concerns about research integrity and publication ethics, before or after publication
How to report	Email jurnal.mamen@gmail.com with the subject Integrity Concern: [Article or Submission Identifier]
Who can be the subject of a report	Authors, reviewers, editors, and the staff or the managers of the journal
Who handles a report	An editor who has no conflict of interest
Anonymous reports	Can be assessed when they are specific and can be verified
Protection of reporters	Confidential as far as possible. Retaliation against a reporter who acts in good faith is not accepted
Disagreement with a decision	Use the appeal procedure in the Peer Review Process (section 6), not this procedure

Concerns and the Policies That Apply

The table gives examples of concerns and the policy that explains the standard. A concern can fall under more than one policy.

Example of a concern	Policy that applies
Plagiarism, text recycling, fabricated or falsified data (for example survey responses or financial data), manipulated images, fabricated references, duplicate publication	Plagiarism and Research Integrity Policy
Gift, guest, or ghost authorship, and authorship disputes	Authorship and Contributorship
A competing interest or a source of funding that was not declared	Conflicts of Interest
Use of generative AI that was not disclosed or that is prohibited	Generative AI Policies
Research without the permission of the organization or the consent of the participants that is required, or a breach of the privacy of respondents, employees, informants, or organizations	Publication Ethics
Manipulation of peer review, or a breach of confidentiality by an editor or a reviewer	Publication Ethics and Peer Review Process

1. Submitting a Report

1.1 How to report

Item	Instruction
Send to	jurnal.mamen@gmail.com
Subject line	Integrity Concern: [Article or Submission Identifier]
Subject of the report	A report can be about authors, reviewers, editors, or the staff and the managers of the journal.
Sensitive data	Do not send sensitive personal data through an unsecured channel.

1.2 What to include

No.	Item	Content
1	Identifier	The title or the identifier of the manuscript or the article.
2	Description	A clear and specific description of the concern.
3	Evidence	Supporting evidence, such as documents, data, or links to sources.
4	Interests of the reporter	Any conflict of interest of the reporter, and any consideration of confidentiality.

1.3 Report or appeal?

Situation	Where to go
You suspect misconduct, including misconduct in the review process	This policy. Send a report as described in section 1.1.
You disagree with the editorial decision on your manuscript	The appeal procedure in section 6 of the Peer Review Process. Use the subject Appeal: [Manuscript Identifier]. Disagreement alone is not a reason for reconsideration.
You want to comment on the scholarly content of a published article	Post Publication Discussion.

2. Initial Assessment

Step	Stage	What happens
1	Receipt	The editorial office records every report and, when contact details are given, confirms that the report has been received.
2	Screening	An editor who has no conflict of interest decides whether the concern is within the scope of the journal, whether it has enough detail, and whether the reporter must clarify it.
3	Decision to continue	A report with substance goes on to the next stage. A report that is not supported by evidence may be closed, and it can be reconsidered if new evidence appears.

Two principles apply to every report.

No.	Principle
1	A report is judged on its substance and not on the status of the person who sends it.
2	An anonymous report can be assessed when it is specific and is supported by information that can be verified.

A concern about the Editor in Chief or the Managing Editor is handled by another editor who is not involved. When it is needed, the publisher is informed at jurnal@literasisains.id. The publisher can support the handling, but it does not decide on a manuscript.

3. Fairness, Preliminary Checks, and Referral

Topic	Rule
Opportunity to respond	The subject of a specific concern can normally respond. Safeguards may apply to protect the process and the people who are involved.
Preliminary checks	The journal may make limited checks before it contacts the parties, for example to keep evidence or to protect research participants.
Pause of processing	The editorial processing of the manuscript or the article that is affected may be paused while a credible concern is assessed. This is a precaution and not a finding of misconduct.
Referral	A matter that is beyond the authority of the journal may be referred to the institution of the authors, to the funder, or to another competent body.

4. Investigation and Outcomes

No.	Rule
1	An editor who has no conflict of interest leads any case that needs a closer examination. The editor may consult members of the Editorial Board or independent experts.
2	The authors and other persons who are concerned are asked to explain their actions and, when it is relevant, to provide data, documents, or permissions.
3	Decisions are based on evidence and are proportionate to the seriousness of the case.
4	The journal keeps a confidential record of the report and of the steps that were taken.

4.1 Possible outcomes before publication

No.	Outcome
1	A request for clarification, for corrected citations, or for a correct attribution.
2	A request to rewrite or to revise the manuscript.
3	A request for data, permissions, or documents.
4	A pause of the editorial evaluation.
5	Rejection of the manuscript, when serious misconduct is established.

4.2 Possible outcomes after publication

Action on a published article follows the policy on Correction and Retraction.

No.	Outcome
1	A correction or a corrigendum.
2	An expression of concern while an investigation is not yet complete.
3	A retraction, when the published record is substantially unreliable or when serious misconduct is proven.
4	A notice to the relevant institutions or authorities.
5	Other proportionate steps to protect the scholarly record.
6	A withdrawal or a retraction after publication leads to the penalty fee that is stated on the Author Fees page.

5. Confidentiality and Protection of People Who Raise Concerns

No.	Rule
1	A report is handled confidentially. The information is shared only with the people who need it to assess the concern.
2	The identity of a person who reports in good faith is kept confidential as far as possible.
3	Retaliation against a person who reports in good faith is not accepted.
4	A report that is knowingly false or malicious is itself a breach of publication ethics.