Allegations of Research and Publication Misconduct Policy

Penelitian Gizi dan Makanan (The Journal of Nutrition and Food Research) is committed to maintaining the integrity, reliability, and transparency of the scholarly record. Allegations of research or publication misconduct involving submitted manuscripts, published articles, peer review, editorial activities, or other aspects of the journal's publishing process will be handled fairly, confidentially, impartially, and in accordance with relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, editorial staff, and other individuals involved in the journal's publication processes.

1. Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

Conduct covered by this policy includes, but is not limited to:

  1. Fabrication and falsification: making up data or research results, manipulating research processes, or altering or omitting data in ways that misrepresent the research findings.

  2. Plagiarism and inappropriate text recycling: using another person's words, ideas, data, images, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate attribution, or reusing previously published material inappropriately.

  3. Duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission or publication: submitting or publishing substantially overlapping work without appropriate disclosure or justification.

  4. Authorship and contributorship misconduct: misrepresenting authorship, omitting eligible contributors, including individuals without appropriate contributions, or making unauthorized changes to authorship.

  5. Image, figure, or data manipulation: manipulating research images, figures, tables, or other evidence in ways that distort or misrepresent the findings.

  6. Citation manipulation: including inappropriate citation practices, coercive citation, or coordinated efforts to distort citation records.

  7. Peer review or editorial manipulation: falsifying reviewer identities, manipulating peer review, or improperly influencing editorial decisions.

  8. Undisclosed competing interests or funding: failing to disclose relevant financial, professional, personal, or institutional interests that may affect the interpretation or assessment of research.

  9. Research ethics violations: conducting or reporting research involving human participants, animals, personal data, or protected materials without appropriate ethical oversight, consent, or safeguards where required.

  10. Misrepresentation of research documentation: providing false or misleading information about ethical approval, informed consent, data availability, research methods, or research reproducibility.

  11. Paper-mill activity or fraudulent submission practices: submitting fabricated or systematically manipulated manuscripts or using deceptive services to misrepresent the origin, authorship, or validity of research.

  12. Breaches of confidentiality: unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential manuscript materials, unpublished research, or peer-review information.

  13. Inappropriate use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies: using such technologies in ways that violate the journal's applicable policies or materially misrepresent authorship, research data, or the origin and reliability of submitted content.

This list is not exhaustive. Honest errors, legitimate scientific disagreement, and differences in interpretation do not, by themselves, constitute research or publication misconduct. Such matters may nevertheless require clarification or editorial action when the reliability of the scholarly record is affected.

2. Reporting an Allegation

Any person may report suspected research or publication misconduct involving a manuscript submitted to or an article published in the journal. Reports may also concern the conduct of reviewers, editors, editorial staff, or other individuals involved in the publication process.

Reports should be submitted in writing to:

Editorial Office: pgmpersagi@gmail.com

Recommended email subject: Allegation of Research or Publication Misconduct

Where available, the report should include:

  1. The article title, DOI, URL, or manuscript identification number.

  2. The names of the individuals or activities concerned.

  3. A clear description of the suspected misconduct.

  4. Relevant passages, data, images, citations, or other materials.

  5. Supporting evidence and any relevant relationship or competing interest of the reporting person.

Reporters are not required to establish conclusively that misconduct occurred. However, reports should be made in good faith and provide sufficient information to support an initial assessment.

The journal may consider anonymous allegations when they contain specific and verifiable evidence. Anonymous reporting may limit the journal's ability to seek clarification, communicate with the reporter, or obtain additional information.

The journal may decline allegations that are clearly unsupported or appear to have been made primarily to harass, intimidate, or pursue unrelated personal disputes. Any credible concern about publication integrity identified in such a report may still be assessed.

3. Principles and Responsibilities

The journal will handle allegations according to the following principles.

Confidentiality. Information will be shared only with individuals who need it to assess, investigate, or resolve the matter. The journal will make reasonable efforts to protect the identity of the reporter and other individuals involved. Absolute confidentiality cannot be guaranteed where disclosure is necessary for a fair process or required by law.

Fairness and right of response. The person whose conduct is questioned will normally be informed of the substance of the allegation and given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Disclosure may be delayed where necessary to protect evidence, confidentiality, or an external investigation.

Impartiality. Allegations must be handled by qualified individuals without relevant competing interests. Anyone with a conflict of interest must withdraw from the assessment or decision-making process.

Proportionality. The assessment and any resulting action will reflect the credibility, seriousness, available evidence, and potential consequences of the allegation.

Protection of the scholarly record. The journal's responsibility is to assess the reliability of submitted and published content and take appropriate editorial action when the integrity of the scholarly record may be compromised.

The journal does not replace formal investigations conducted by research institutions, employers, funders, ethics committees, regulators, or other competent authorities. Such bodies may investigate research conduct and determine institutional or disciplinary consequences. The journal remains responsible for editorial decisions concerning submitted manuscripts and published articles.

4. Assessment and Investigation Procedure

4.1. Preliminary Assessment

Where contact information is available, the journal will acknowledge receipt of the allegation.

The Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor without a relevant conflict of interest will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the journal's remit, whether the allegation is sufficiently specific and credible, and whether further action is warranted.

The journal may request additional information and preserve relevant submission files, correspondence, reviewer reports, research data, images, similarity reports, and other records necessary for the assessment.

4.2. Response and Independent Assessment

Where appropriate, the journal will request an explanation and supporting documentation from the person or persons concerned.

Depending on the circumstances, the journal may contact the corresponding author, individual 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.

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

Failure to respond within a reasonable period does not prevent the journal from proceeding on the available evidence.

4.3. Referral to Institutions or Other Bodies

When a formal investigation of research conduct is required, the journal may refer the matter to the relevant institution, employer, funder, ethics committee, regulator, or other competent body.

The journal may provide relevant evidence and cooperate with institutional investigations, subject to applicable confidentiality, data-protection, and legal requirements. It may also cooperate with other publishers where the same content or suspected misconduct affects multiple publications.

The journal is not required to wait indefinitely for an institutional investigation before taking editorial action. Where the available evidence is sufficient, or delay would expose readers to significant risk, the journal may act independently to protect the scholarly record.

5. Interim Measures and Outcomes

5.1. Interim Measures

While an allegation is being assessed, the journal may:

  1. Suspend peer review, editorial decision-making, acceptance, or publication.

  2. Request additional data, images, documentation, or explanations.

  3. Delay publication of an accepted manuscript.

  4. Refer the matter to an appropriate institution or authority.

  5. Publish an Expression of Concern when serious unresolved questions affect a published article.

Interim measures are precautionary and do not, by themselves, constitute a finding of misconduct.

5.2. Submitted Manuscripts

Depending on the evidence and findings, the journal may:

  1. Close the matter without further action.

  2. Request clarification, correction, additional analysis, or supporting evidence.

  3. Require appropriate changes to authorship, acknowledgements, disclosures, data statements, or citations.

  4. Continue, repeat, or terminate peer review.

  5. Reject the manuscript or withdraw an acceptance decision.

  6. Refer the matter to an institution, funder, another journal, or competent authority.

Any action will be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the established concern and the circumstances of the case.

5.3. Published Articles

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

  1. Take no further action.

  2. Publish a clarification or Correction.

  3. Publish an Expression of Concern.

  4. Retract the article.

  5. Retract and replace the article where permitted under the journal's applicable policy.

  6. Remove the article in exceptional circumstances involving legal requirements, serious infringement of rights, or substantial risk of harm.

Such actions will follow the journal's applicable Corrections, Retractions, Withdrawals, Removals, and Replacements Policy.

When an allegation is not substantiated, the journal will close the case without an adverse finding and take reasonable steps to avoid unnecessary reputational harm to those involved.

6. Allegations Involving Editors, Reviewers, or the Journal

Allegations involving an editor or reviewer must be handled by another qualified individual who has not participated in the relevant matter and has no relevant competing interest.

An allegation involving the Editor-in-Chief or the Editorial Office should be submitted to the journal's publisher or responsible publishing institution through an independent contact:

Publisher/Institutional Contact:

Sekretariat DPP PERSAGI. Grand Centro Blok B2 Jl. Bintaro Permai,
Pesanggrahan Jakarta Selatan INDONESIA

The publisher or responsible institution 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.

If the designated person or body also has a relevant competing interest, the matter must be referred to another independent and appropriately authorized party.

7. Communication, Records, and Reconsideration

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

The reporting person may be informed whether the matter was assessed, referred, closed, or resulted in public editorial action. Confidential evidence, personal information, and restricted institutional findings may not be disclosed.

Public editorial notices will provide sufficient information to explain the action taken without including defamatory, confidential, or legally restricted material.

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

A person directly affected by a finding or editorial action may request reconsideration when material new evidence becomes available, a significant procedural error may have affected the outcome, or a relevant competing interest was not identified. Requests must explain the grounds and provide supporting evidence. Mere disagreement with the decision is insufficient.

Where practicable, reconsideration will be handled by a person who was not responsible for the original decision and has no relevant competing interest.

8. Related Policies and COPE Guidance

This policy should be read together with the journal's policies on:

  1. Publication Ethics.

  2. Complaints and Appeals.

  3. Plagiarism Screening.

  4. Authorship and Contributorship.

  5. Conflicts of Interest.

  6. Research Ethics and Ethical Oversight.

  7. Artificial Intelligence, where applicable.

  8. Corrections, Retractions, Withdrawals, Removals, and Replacements.

  9. Post-Publication Discussions.

The journal will follow relevant COPE Core Practices and guidance, including the COPE flowcharts for handling suspected research and publication misconduct.

COPE resources:

  1. COPE Core Practices: https://publicationethics.org/core-practices

  2. COPE Flowcharts: https://cope.onl/flowcharts-3

  3. COPE guidance on cooperation between research institutions and journals: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2018.1.3

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

The journal will periodically review this policy to maintain consistency with developments in research integrity, publication ethics, applicable law, and COPE guidance.