Allegation of Research Misconduct

Allegations of Research and Publication Misconduct Policy

1. Purpose and Scope

MEV is committed to protecting the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of the scholarly record. All allegations of research or publication misconduct relating to submitted manuscripts, published articles, peer review, editorial activities, or other content associated with MEV will be considered seriously and handled in accordance with the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, editorial staff, and any other person involved in MEV’s research and publication processes.

2. Conduct Covered by This Policy

Research and publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

• fabrication or falsification of data, results, methods, or research records;

• inappropriate manipulation of images, figures, or other research evidence;

• plagiarism, substantial unattributed copying, or inappropriate text recycling;

• duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission or publication;

• false, misleading, omitted, or inappropriate authorship and contributorship;

• citation manipulation, coercive citation, or organized citation arrangements;

• manipulation of peer review, reviewer identity, or editorial processes;

• failure to disclose relevant competing interests or sources of funding;

• unethical research involving humans, animals, personal data, or other protected materials;

• misrepresentation of ethical approval, informed consent, data availability, or reproducibility;

• paper-mill activity, fabricated manuscripts, or fraudulent submission practices;

• unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential manuscript or peer-review information;

• undisclosed or prohibited use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies; and

• any other conduct that may materially compromise the integrity of the research or publication record.

Honest error, legitimate scientific disagreement, or differences in interpretation do not, by themselves, constitute misconduct. However, such matters may still require clarification or correction of the scholarly record.

3. Reporting an Allegation

Any person may report a suspected case of research or publication misconduct involving MEV.

Allegations should be submitted in writing to the MEV Editorial Office at:

Email: jmev@brin.go.id
Recommended subject: Allegation of Research or Publication Misconduct

A report should provide, where available:

• the title, DOI, URL, or manuscript identification number of the relevant work;

• the names of the persons involved;

• a clear description of the suspected misconduct;

• the specific passages, data, images, citations, review records, or other materials concerned;

• copies of or links to relevant supporting evidence; and

• any relationship or competing interest the reporting person may have concerning the matter.

A person reporting a concern is not required to establish conclusively that misconduct has occurred. However, the allegation should be specific, presented in good faith, and supported by sufficient information to permit an initial assessment.

MEV may consider anonymous allegations when they contain specific and verifiable evidence. The journal’s ability to investigate or communicate the outcome may be limited when the reporting person cannot be contacted.

Allegations made primarily to harass, intimidate, defame, or pursue unrelated personal disputes may be declined. This does not prevent MEV from examining any credible publication-integrity concern contained within such a report.

4. Principles for Handling Allegations

MEV will handle allegations according to the following principles:

Confidentiality

Information concerning an allegation will be shared only with persons who need it to assess, investigate, or resolve the matter. MEV will make reasonable efforts to protect the identity of the person reporting the concern. However, absolute confidentiality or anonymity cannot be guaranteed when disclosure is required for a fair assessment, institutional investigation, or compliance with applicable law.

Fairness and Right of Response

No conclusion of misconduct will be made without an appropriate assessment of the available evidence. Individuals whose conduct is questioned will be informed of the substance of the allegation and given a reasonable opportunity to respond, except where immediate disclosure could compromise evidence, confidentiality, or an external investigation.

Impartiality

The allegation will be handled by editors, experts, or other qualified persons who have no relevant conflicts of interest. Anyone with a conflict of interest must withdraw from handling the case.

Proportionality

The extent of the inquiry and any resulting action will be proportionate to the nature, credibility, seriousness, and potential consequences of the concern.

Protection of the Scholarly Record

The primary editorial objective is to ensure that submitted and published content is reliable and that readers are informed when material concerns affect the validity or integrity of an article.

5. Procedure for Handling Allegations

5.1 Receipt and Preliminary Assessment

Where contact information is available, MEV will acknowledge receipt of the allegation. The Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine:

• whether the matter falls within MEV’s responsibility;

• whether the allegation is sufficiently specific and credible;

• whether relevant evidence is available;

• whether an immediate editorial action is necessary; and

• whether any editor or staff member has a conflict of interest.

MEV may request additional information from the reporting person before proceeding.

5.2 Securing Relevant Records

MEV may preserve relevant submission files, correspondence, reviewer reports, editorial records, similarity reports, data, images, and other documentation needed to assess the allegation.

The journal may suspend peer review, editorial decision-making, acceptance, production, or publication while a serious concern is being examined.

5.3 Response from the Parties Concerned

MEV will ordinarily contact the author, reviewer, editor, or other person whose conduct is questioned and request a detailed response and supporting documentation.

Depending on the circumstances, MEV may contact the corresponding author, all authors, specific co-authors, reviewers, editors, or other relevant parties. The corresponding author will not be treated as the sole representative when the allegation concerns that individual or when responses from other authors are necessary.

Failure to respond within a reasonable period may result in MEV proceeding on the basis of the available evidence.

5.4 Independent Expert Assessment

When necessary, MEV may consult independent subject specialists, statistical reviewers, image-integrity experts, research-integrity advisers, or other qualified persons. Confidential information will be disclosed only to the extent necessary for the assessment.

5.5 Referral to Institutions or Other Bodies

MEV evaluates the integrity and reliability of manuscripts and published articles but does not replace a formal investigation by an employer, university, research institution, funder, ethics committee, regulator, or other competent authority.

When a formal investigation of research conduct is required, MEV may refer the matter to the relevant institution or competent body and provide relevant information in accordance with applicable confidentiality and data-protection requirements.

MEV may also cooperate with other journals or publishers when the same content, data, authors, reviewers, or alleged misconduct affects multiple publications.

MEV is not required to wait indefinitely for an institutional investigation before taking editorial action. When the available evidence is sufficient or the published record presents an immediate risk to readers, MEV may act independently to protect the scholarly record.

5.6 Interim Measures

While an investigation is pending, MEV may:

• suspend the submission, review, acceptance, or publication process;

• request additional data, images, documentation, or explanations;

• delay publication of an accepted manuscript;

• notify relevant institutions or authorities; or

• publish an Expression of Concern when serious unresolved questions affect a published article.

An Expression of Concern does not constitute a final finding of misconduct. It informs readers that significant concerns are under examination.

6. Possible Outcomes

6.1 Submitted Manuscripts

Depending on the findings, MEV may:

• close the matter without further action;

• request clarification, correction, additional analysis, or supporting evidence;

• require changes to authorship, acknowledgements, disclosures, data statements, or citations;

• continue, repeat, or terminate peer review;

• reject the manuscript;

• withdraw an acceptance decision;

• decline future involvement of a reviewer or editor; or

• refer the matter to an institution, funder, another journal, or competent authority.

6.2 Published Articles

Depending on the reliability of the published content and the seriousness of the findings, MEV may:

• take no further action;

• publish a clarification;

• publish a correction;

• publish an Expression of Concern;

• retract the article;

• retract and replace the article where the conditions under MEV’s applicable policy are met; or

• remove the article only in exceptional circumstances involving legal requirements, serious infringement of rights, or substantial risk of harm.

Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and retraction notices will be clearly identified, permanently available, and linked to the affected article. A retracted article will ordinarily remain accessible and be clearly marked as retracted to preserve the transparency of the scholarly record.

When an allegation is not substantiated, the case will be closed without an adverse finding. MEV will take reasonable steps to avoid unnecessary reputational harm to the persons involved.

7. Allegations Involving Editors, Reviewers, or the Journal

Allegations involving an editor or reviewer will be handled by another editor or qualified person who has not participated in the relevant submission and has no conflict of interest.

An allegation involving the Editor-in-Chief or the MEV Editorial Office should be submitted to the publisher at:

Email: jurnal@rmpi.brin.go.id

The publisher will designate an appropriate independent person or body to assess the matter. A person who is the subject of an allegation must not participate in decisions concerning that allegation.

8. Communication of the Outcome

MEV will inform directly affected parties of the outcome where appropriate and consistent with confidentiality, privacy, and legal obligations.

The person who reported the concern may be informed whether the matter was assessed, referred, closed, or resulted in public editorial action. MEV may be unable to disclose confidential evidence, personal information, institutional findings, or internal deliberations.

Public editorial actions, such as corrections, Expressions of Concern, and retractions, will provide sufficient information to explain the reason for the action without including defamatory, confidential, or legally restricted material.

9. Requests for Reconsideration

A person directly affected by a finding or editorial action may request reconsideration when:

• material new evidence has become available;

• a significant procedural error may have affected the outcome; or

• a relevant conflict of interest was not identified during the original assessment.

A request for reconsideration must explain the grounds and provide supporting evidence. Mere disagreement with the conclusion is not sufficient. Where practicable, the request will be considered by a person who was not responsible for the original decision.

10. Records and Data Protection

MEV will maintain appropriate confidential records of allegations, correspondence, evidence, assessments, decisions, and resulting actions in accordance with applicable BRIN policies, data-protection requirements, and legal obligations.

Information obtained through an allegation will be used only for legitimate editorial, research-integrity, legal, or regulatory purposes.

11. Relationship to Other MEV Policies

This policy should be read together with MEV’s policies on:

• Publication Ethics;

• Complaints and Appeals;

• Plagiarism Screening;

• Artificial Intelligence;

• Authorship and Contributorship;

• Conflicts of Interest;

• Corrections, Retractions, and Article Withdrawal; and

• Post-Publication Discussion.

Where policies overlap, MEV will apply the procedure most appropriate to the nature and status of the case.

12. Policy Review

MEV will periodically review and update this policy to remain consistent with developments in research integrity, publication ethics, applicable law, and COPE guidance.

Last updated: August 2026