Allegation of Research Misconduct

Allegations of Misconduct Policy

Provider Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan (PROJIP) takes all allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously. The journal is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in accordance with the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Substantiated concerns regarding research or publication integrity will be evaluated whether raised before, during, or after publication. The receipt of a report initiates a formal, objective assessment; it does not in itself establish that misconduct has occurred.

  1. Submitting a Report

Concerns regarding research ethics, publication ethics, or data integrity must be formally directed to the Editorial Office of PROJIP via email with the subject line:

Integrity Concern – [Article Title or Submission ID]

Reports must include:

  • Identification: The article or manuscript details, including the manuscript title, author names, submission ID, or persistent DOI (if already published).
  • Specific Description: A clear explanation of the alleged misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, unethical informant handling in governmental field studies, duplicate submission, citation manipulation, authorship dispute, or undisclosed conflicts of interest).
  • Supporting Documentation: Concrete evidence, comparative text extracts with original source citations, comparative datasets, or direct links enabling systematic verification.
  • Conflict of Interest Declaration: Any relevant commercial, personal, or professional relationship between the complainant and the accused parties.

Reports may concern authors, reviewers, section editors, or editorial board members. Complainants should avoid transmitting sensitive or non-relevant personal data through unencrypted channels.

  1. Initial Editorial Assessment
  1. Intake and Registry: The editorial team formally records the case and acknowledges receipt of the complaint within 3 to 5 business days when contact details are provided.
  2. Conflict Clearance: The assessment is handled exclusively by a non-conflicted editor (typically the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Senior Editor). If the concern involves the Editor-in-Chief, an independent handling editor from the Editorial Board or the Head of the Program Studi Ilmu Pemerintahan, Universitas Ichsan Gorontalo, will lead the evaluation.
  3. Substantive Scrutiny: Concerns are assessed solely on their factual merits, independent of the complainant's academic rank, affiliation, or seniority. Anonymous reports are evaluated if they provide sufficiently verifiable evidence and clear documentation.
  4. Sufficiency of Evidence: Vague or unsubstantiated assertions will be held pending additional clarification. Dismissing an insufficiently documented complaint does not preclude future re-examination should new, credible evidence be submitted.
  1. Fairness, Right of Response, and Institutional Referral
  • Due Process: When an allegation is deemed credible, the affected parties (e.g., corresponding author or reviewer) will be notified in writing of the specific concerns raised and granted a reasonable timeframe (typically 14 to 21 days) to provide a factual response and supporting documentation.
  • Precautionary Suspension: Editorial review, copyediting, or production of an active submission may be temporarily suspended while the matter is under evaluation. This suspension is strictly a neutral safeguard and does not constitute a finding of misconduct.
  • Institutional Cooperation: Where allegations involve primary data fraud, breach of human subject ethics (e.g., unauthorized access to state/governmental confidential documents or informants), or unresolved authorship conflicts beyond the editorial team's investigative authority, the matter will be formally referred to the research ethics committee or integrity office of the authors' home institution.
  1. Outcomes and Resolution

All resolutions follow official COPE Flowcharts:

  • Unsubstantiated Concerns: If the investigation finds no wrongdoing, the case is closed, and editorial processing resumes without prejudice.
  • Minor Errors / Inadvertent Omissions: Resolved through an official Correction / Erratum.
  • Pending Complex Inquiries: If an institutional investigation is ongoing and conclusive findings are delayed, the journal may issue an Expression of Concern.
  • Confirmed Severe Misconduct: If deliberate plagiarism, data fabrication, or major ethical violations are confirmed, unpublished manuscripts are rejected, and published articles are formally retracted following the journal's Retraction Policy, with notifications transmitted to relevant institutional heads and indexing databases (e.g., SINTA, Garuda).

Related Policies & Contact

  • Related Policies: Author Guidelines, Editorial & Review Process, Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement, Corrections and Retractions Policy.
  • Editorial Office: Provider Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan (PROJIP)
  • Publisher: Program Studi Ilmu Pemerintahan, Universitas Ichsan Gorontalo
  • Portal: https://ejurnal.unisan.ac.id/index.php/projip
  • Address: Kampus Universitas Ichsan Gorontalo, Jl. Drs. Achmad Nadjamudin No 10, Dulalowo Timur, Kota Tengah, Kota Gorontalo, Provinsi Gorontalo, 96115 – Indonesia