 |
PLAGIARISM AND RESEARCH INTEGRITY POLICY
STORAGE: Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik dan Ilmu Komputer values originality, transparency, academic integrity, and responsible scholarly communication in architecture, civil engineering, mechanical engineering, and computer science. This policy explains how the journal checks manuscripts for originality and how it responds to concerns about integrity.
Authors are encouraged to check their manuscript with a similarity tool before they submit it, and every submission must include the Letter of Originality. Please read this policy together with the Publication Ethics and the Generative AI Policies.
Screening Policy at a Glance
| Item | Policy |
|---|---|
| Plagiarism screening | Yes, for all manuscripts |
| Screening tools | Similarity detection software, such as Turnitin, together with the judgment of the editors |
| Similarity indicator | A score of about 15 percent or higher may lead to additional editorial examination |
| Automatic rejection by percentage | No |
| Final assessment | Human editorial evaluation |
| Letter of Originality | Submitted by the authors together with the manuscript |
1Definition of Plagiarism
Plagiarism is presenting the words, ideas, data, arguments, images, results, source code, designs, or other creative work of another person as one's own, without proper credit, citation, quotation, or the required permission. It may be intentional, or it may result from careless attribution.
2Forms of Plagiarism
The following forms are examples. The list is not exhaustive.
| Form | Description |
|---|---|
| Direct plagiarism | Copying text word for word without quotation marks and without a citation. |
| Paraphrasing without attribution | Rewording the text of another author without giving credit to the source. |
| Mosaic or patchwork plagiarism | Combining phrases and passages from several sources, or changing a few words, without acknowledging the sources. |
| Unattributed ideas | Using the theories, methods, models, interpretations, or arguments of others without credit. |
| Improper use of data | Using data, measurements, statistics, or results from other work without citing the source. |
| Improper use of code | Copying source code, algorithms, scripts, or models without credit, or without respecting the license. |
| Improper use of protected material | Using figures, tables, drawings, diagrams, designs, questionnaires, or datasets of others without attribution or permission. |
| Quotation misrepresentation | Failing to mark quoted material clearly as a quotation. |
| Source misrepresentation | Giving citations that are inaccurate or misleading, or that do not support the statement. |
| Translation plagiarism | Translating the text of another author, from Indonesian into English or the other way round, and presenting it as original work. |
| Unauthorized authorship | Submitting work that was written by another person, including work from paid writing services. |
| Inappropriate text recycling | Reusing one's own published text without disclosure or citation. |
The use of generative AI tools must follow the Generative AI Policies of the journal.
3Text Recycling, Thesis Based Articles, and Redundant Publication
| Topic | Rule |
|---|---|
| Reuse of earlier work | Authors must disclose and cite their own earlier published work when they reuse it. Substantial duplication may be treated as inappropriate text recycling or redundant publication. Limited overlap, such as the standard description of a method, may be acceptable. |
| How editors judge overlap | Editors consider the amount of the duplication, its location in the manuscript, the context, the attribution, whether it is necessary, and its scholarly significance. |
| Articles based on a thesis, a final project, or a dissertation | The article should say that it is based on the thesis, the final project, or the dissertation, for example in the acknowledgments. It must be rewritten as an article and must not be copied from the original document. |
| Concurrent submission | A manuscript must not be submitted to another journal at the same time. |
4Similarity and Plagiarism Screening
All manuscripts go through editorial originality screening, before or during the editorial review, with similarity detection software such as Turnitin.
- A similarity percentage is only a screening signal. It is never proof of plagiarism.
- Each report is reviewed by an editor or by an authorized member of the editorial team. The reviewer considers the source, the amount, the location, and the nature of the matches, and also the attribution and the context.
Matches that are usually acceptable
- bibliographies and lists of references;
- text that is correctly quoted and cited;
- common technical terms and standard expressions;
- standard statements of a method, and names of standards, codes, and regulations;
- names of institutions;
- legitimate references to earlier publications.
Similarity indicator. Manuscripts are normally expected to show a low overall similarity. A similarity score of about 15 percent or higher may lead to additional editorial examination.
This is not an automatic threshold for rejection. A manuscript below this level can still contain plagiarism, and a manuscript above it may contain only acceptable matches. The editors make the final judgment.
5Other Forms of Research Misconduct
The following practices are treated as serious, even when no plagiarism is found.
| No. | Misconduct | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation of data | Experimental measurements, test results, simulation outputs, survey data, benchmark results, or datasets that are invented, changed, or selectively presented. |
| 2 | Manipulation or duplication of figures and images | Altered or reused figures, plots, photographs, screenshots, or drawings that give a false impression. |
| 3 | Fabricated or falsified references and DOIs | Citations to sources that do not exist, or references with false details. |
| 4 | Manipulation of citations | Adding or arranging citations only to raise the citation count of a person or a journal. |
| 5 | Undisclosed duplicate or redundant publication | Publishing essentially the same work more than once without a clear explanation. |
| 6 | Inappropriate authorship practices | Gift, guest, and ghost authorship. See the Authorship and Contributorship policy. |
| 7 | Manipulation of the peer review process | False identities, false reviews, or an arrangement of the review to gain an unfair advantage. |
| 8 | Deliberate misrepresentation | False statements about the methods, the ethical permission and consent, the participants, the software, the findings, or the sources. |
These cases are handled under the Publication Ethics and the Allegations of Misconduct policies.
6Editorial Screening Procedure
| Stage | Action |
|---|---|
| 1. Screening | The manuscript is checked with similarity and integrity tools. |
| 2. Human assessment | An editor reviews the matched passages and the sources. |
| 3. Clarification | The authors may be asked to explain the matches, to correct them, to add citations, to rewrite the text, or to provide documents. |
| 4. Editorial decision | The outcome is proportionate to the seriousness of the concern. |
7Action Before Publication
Depending on the case, the editors may take one or more of the following steps.
| Action | Use |
|---|---|
| Request clarification | The authors explain the matches, the sources, or the data. |
| Request corrected citations or attribution | The authors add the missing citations or correct the wrong ones. |
| Require rewriting or revision | The authors rewrite the material that overlaps with other work. |
| Request data, permissions, or documents | For example raw data, permission to reuse a figure, ethical approval, or the license of source code. |
| Pause the evaluation | The evaluation waits while the concern is examined. |
| Reject the manuscript | Substantial plagiarism, duplication, fabrication, falsification, or other serious misconduct is established. |
8Action After Publication
An investigation can continue after the publication. It follows the Correction and Retraction policy, and the editors may take the following steps.
| Action | Use |
|---|---|
| Correction or corrigendum | A part of the article needs to be corrected. |
| Expression of concern | An investigation is not yet resolved. |
| Retraction | The record is substantially unreliable, or serious misconduct is proven. |
| Notification of institutions or authorities | The institutions of the authors, or other competent bodies, are informed. |
| Other proportionate steps | Any other step that protects the scholarly record. |
9Automated Screening and Human Oversight
Automated tools support the editors, but they do not decide whether misconduct has occurred. Qualified editors make the final decision on suspected plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, fabricated references, concerns about the use of AI, and other misconduct.
Our Commitment
STORAGE assesses a concern about similarity on the basis of evidence and context, not on a percentage alone, and it responds in a way that is proportionate when a concern is confirmed. Questions about this policy can be sent to the editorial office at jurnal.storage@gmail.com. See also the Peer Review Process and the Author Guidelines.
