Plagiarism And Data Integrity

Research Integrity

Plagiarism, Text Recycling, and Data Integrity Policy

Multidisciplinary Journals (MJ)  |  e-ISSN 3047-8499

Multidisciplinary Journals (MJ) requires submitted and published work to represent the authors' original scholarship, to acknowledge all sources accurately, and to report data, images, methods, and findings honestly. MJ screens manuscripts for similarity and evaluates suspected plagiarism, text recycling, redundant publication, data fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, and citation manipulation through a fair, confidential, evidence-based process.

Similarity is not the same as plagiarism A similarity percentage identifies matching text; it does not determine authorship, attribution, context, intent, copyright status, data reliability, or misconduct. MJ does not make an editorial decision solely from an overall similarity score. Editors examine the location, source, extent, scholarly significance, citation, and explanation of each relevant match.
Screening Tool MJ may use Turnitin or another appropriate similarity-detection service to support editorial assessment.
Human Assessment A qualified editor evaluates the report, manuscript, cited sources, explanations, and effect on the scholarly record.
Proportionate Action The response is based on evidence, seriousness, reliability, cooperation, due process, and the stage of publication.

1. Purpose, Scope, and Policy Boundary

This policy applies to all manuscripts, revisions, accepted manuscripts, published articles, supplementary files, datasets submitted for editorial assessment, tables, figures, images, translations, conference-derived manuscripts, reviews, editorials, and other content considered or published by MJ. It also applies to material submitted by editors, board members, reviewers, guest editors, and staff.

This page is the authoritative source for originality screening and the assessment of plagiarism, text recycling, duplicate or redundant publication, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate image alteration, and citation manipulation. It does not prescribe manuscript-withdrawal charges or repeat the journal's procedures for corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, authorship disputes, copyright licensing, peer review, or formal appeals. Those matters are governed by the separate policies identified in Section 13.

2. Definitions

Term Meaning in This Policy
Plagiarism Presenting another person's words, ideas, data, results, images, methods, structure, creative work, or other intellectual contribution as one's own without appropriate acknowledgement, quotation, citation, or permission where required.
Text recycling Reusing one's own previously disseminated text without transparent citation or explanation. Its acceptability depends on the amount, location, purpose, copyright or licence, and whether the reuse misleads readers about novelty.
Duplicate or redundant publication Publishing or submitting substantially the same findings, data, analysis, or article more than once without transparent cross-reference, justification, permission, and editorial agreement.
Fabrication Making up data, observations, participants, sources, results, records, quotations, references, approvals, or other research information and reporting them as genuine.
Falsification Manipulating, omitting, suppressing, altering, or misrepresenting research materials, procedures, data, analysis, images, or results so that the research record is inaccurate or misleading.
Inappropriate image manipulation Undisclosed or misleading alteration, duplication, splicing, enhancement, removal, relabelling, or selective presentation of an image or visual result that changes interpretation or conceals relevant information.
Citation manipulation Adding, omitting, coordinating, or coercing citations primarily to misrepresent the literature, conceal a source, inflate citation indicators, or advantage an author, reviewer, editor, journal, or organisation.

3. Author Responsibilities

  • Submit original work that is not under concurrent consideration elsewhere and does not substantially duplicate a published or submitted work without transparent justification and editorial approval.
  • Cite the original and relevant sources for ideas, methods, data, quotations, images, tables, arguments, software, instruments, and other reused material.
  • Place exact words in quotation marks or an appropriate block-quotation format and provide an accurate citation. Paraphrasing requires citation and must not reproduce the source's expression too closely.
  • Obtain written permission for copyrighted or otherwise restricted material when permission is legally or contractually required, and retain evidence for editorial verification.
  • Disclose related manuscripts, preprints, conference papers, reports, theses, datasets, translations, or other prior dissemination that may overlap with the submission.
  • Identify reused material from the authors' own previous publications and explain how the submitted work differs and adds a substantial scholarly contribution.
  • Preserve relevant underlying data and records, provide them confidentially when reasonably required for editorial assessment, and comply with the journal's Research Data Policy.
  • Correct an error, incomplete citation, inappropriate reuse, or data-integrity concern promptly, whether discovered before or after publication.
Permissions and attribution are different requirements Permission from a copyright holder does not remove the duty to identify and cite the source. Conversely, citation alone does not grant permission when copyright, licence, confidentiality, or contractual terms require separate authorization. Detailed rights and reuse terms belong in the journal's Copyright and Licensing Policy.

4. Prior Dissemination, Conference Papers, and Translations

Prior dissemination is assessed by its content, transparency, copyright or licence, editorial agreement, and the journal's article-type requirements—not by a fixed percentage alone.

  • Conference-derived manuscripts: authors must identify the proceedings or presentation, cite it, provide a copy on request, describe the substantial new contribution, and secure reuse permission where required. Prior presentation does not guarantee eligibility for publication.
  • Theses, dissertations, and institutional reports: the source and repository record must be disclosed and cited where appropriate. The manuscript must satisfy the journal's originality, authorship, reporting, and article-quality requirements.
  • Preprints: any preprint or closely related public version must be declared. Authors remain responsible for consistency of authorship, disclosures, data, copyright, and subsequent linking or updating where applicable.
  • Translations: a previously published work translated into another language is not an original article merely because the language changes. Prior publication, permission, editorial agreement, and transparent labelling must be established before consideration.
  • Secondary or historical republication: exceptional republication must be editorially justified, clearly identified as such, cross-referenced to the original, and permitted by the relevant rights holders.

5. Screening Procedure

MJ may screen a manuscript at initial submission, before or after external review, after a material revision, before publication, or when a credible concern is raised after publication. Screening may include similarity-detection software, manual source comparison, reference checks, image or data review, requests for underlying material, and consultation with suitably qualified advisers.

A similarity report may contain legitimate matches, including:
  • properly quoted and cited text;
  • article titles, references, affiliations, standard declarations, or technical terminology;
  • common descriptions of established methods where original expression is limited;
  • the author's disclosed thesis, preprint, report, protocol, or conference material; and
  • short conventional phrases that do not represent a protected or original scholarly contribution.

Conversely, a low similarity score does not exclude plagiarism of ideas, translated plagiarism, paraphrased plagiarism, fabricated data, manipulated images, concealed redundant publication, or citation manipulation. The editor therefore evaluates the evidence rather than relying on one numerical threshold.

6. Assessment of a Suspected Case

1
Receive and PreserveThe editor records the concern and preserves the relevant manuscript, reports, sources, correspondence, images, data, metadata, and system records.
2
Preliminary AssessmentAn unconflicted editor determines whether the concern is specific, credible, relevant to this policy, and supported by sufficient initial evidence. Clearly mistaken or immaterial concerns may be closed with a record of the reason.
3
Author Notification and ResponseThe corresponding author is normally provided the material concern and asked for a response, clarification, source files, permissions, related works, or underlying data. Co-authors may be contacted separately when necessary.
4
Evidence ReviewThe editor compares the submission with relevant sources and evaluates attribution, extent, location, originality, data reliability, permissions, disclosure, explanation, authors' roles, and possible effect on conclusions.
5
Independent Advice or ReferralThe journal may consult an independent subject, methodological, statistical, image, legal, or ethics adviser. Matters requiring access to laboratory records, employment evidence, interviews, or institutional powers may be referred to an institution, funder, ethics committee, regulator, or other competent body.
6
Reasoned Outcome and RecordThe responsible editor determines an evidence-based, proportionate outcome, communicates it to the relevant parties, implements any editorial action, and documents the reasons and supporting record.

7. Factors Considered

MJ does not classify a case solely by a percentage or number of matching sentences. Relevant factors include:

Nature and originality of the material
Extent, location, and pattern
Presence and accuracy of attribution
Effect on novelty and conclusions
Reliability of data and images
Disclosure of related publications
Explanation and corrective cooperation
Authorship roles and individual responsibility

8. Possible Outcomes Before Publication

Finding Possible Editorial Response
No substantiated concern Close the assessment and continue the ordinary editorial process where otherwise appropriate.
Limited attribution or presentation problem Require corrected citation, quotation, paraphrasing, permission, disclosure, figure labelling, or other revision before further consideration.
Material plagiarism or misleading recycling Reject the manuscript, suspend assessment while evidence is reviewed, contact relevant editors or rights holders when appropriate, or refer the matter to an institution.
Fabrication, falsification, or unreliable evidence Pause or reject the manuscript, request underlying records, obtain independent advice, and refer a credible serious allegation to the appropriate institution or authority.
Deliberate or repeated serious misconduct Apply proportionate, documented restrictions after due process, notify relevant institutions or journals where justified, and permit review under the Appeals and Complaints Policy.
Individual and collective responsibility All authors share responsibility for the integrity of the submitted article, but a restriction or finding is not imposed automatically and identically on every co-author without considering contributor roles, knowledge, evidence, response, and due process. The corresponding author coordinates communication; each author remains accountable for their own contribution and declarations.

9. Post-Publication Concerns

A credible concern raised after publication is assessed under the same principles of evidence, impartiality, confidentiality, author response, and proportionality. The journal does not silently replace or remove a published article to resolve an integrity problem.

When the published record requires action, the form, wording, linking, labelling, and preservation of a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or removal are governed by the separate Article Retraction, Correction, and Removal Policy. This page determines the originality or integrity assessment; the post-publication policy determines the corrective notice.

10. Institutional Referral and Limits of Journal Authority

MJ evaluates the suitability and integrity of content within its editorial responsibility. The journal is not an employer, regulator, court, or research institution and may lack authority to compel testimony, inspect laboratory systems, determine employment misconduct, or impose institutional discipline.

When a credible serious concern requires powers beyond the journal's role, MJ may refer the evidence to the authors' or reviewers' institution, research-integrity office, ethics committee, funder, another journal, regulator, or other competent body. The journal may continue, pause, or revise its editorial action in light of available evidence and any reliable external findings.

11. Confidentiality, Conflicts, and Record Keeping

  • Allegations, evidence, similarity reports, data, correspondence, and internal deliberations are handled as confidential editorial records and shared only as necessary for fair assessment or legitimate referral.
  • An editor, reviewer, staff member, or adviser with a relevant conflict of interest must disclose it and withdraw from handling the case.
  • The journal retains an appropriate record of the allegation, evidence, response, consultations, decisions, referrals, notices, and implementation under its privacy and record-management practices.
  • Anonymous concerns may be assessed when they provide sufficiently specific and verifiable information. Unsupported, abusive, repetitive, or knowingly false allegations may be closed or managed proportionately.
  • Good-faith reporting does not justify retaliation. Deliberately fabricated evidence or malicious allegations may themselves be addressed as misconduct.

12. Appeals and Complaints

An author or other affected person may challenge a material factual error, unmanaged conflict, serious procedural irregularity, disproportionate action, or overlooked evidence under the journal's Appeals and Complaints Policy. Mere disagreement with an evidence-based editorial judgment is not by itself sufficient. An appeal does not automatically suspend a necessary action to protect participants, confidential information, or the scholarly record.

13. Relationship with Other Journal Policies

Policy Page Separate Subject Governed by That Page
Plagiarism, Text Recycling, and Data Integrity Policy Originality screening and assessment of plagiarism, recycling, duplicate publication, fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, and citation manipulation.
Publication Ethics Policy Overarching duties of authors, reviewers, editors, staff, guest editors, and the publisher, including general misconduct handling.
Copyright and Licensing Policy Copyright ownership, first-publication rights, licence terms, repository rights, permissions, and lawful reuse.
Authorship and Contributorship Policy Authorship eligibility, contributor roles, accountability, author order, changes, acknowledgements, and disputes.
Research Data Policy Data availability statements, repositories, sharing, exceptions, documentation, retention, access, and reproducibility.
Peer Review Policy Review model, reviewer selection, confidentiality, stages, report criteria, decisions, revision, and time targets.
Conflict of Interest Policy Disclosure, assessment, recusal, safeguards, documentation, and publication of financial and non-financial competing interests.
Article Retraction, Correction, and Removal Policy Corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, removals, notices, linking, labelling, and preservation of published content.
Manuscript Withdrawal Policy Author-initiated withdrawal, editorial withdrawal, required documentation, timing, responsibilities, and any separately published financial terms.
Appeals and Complaints Policy Valid appeal grounds, complaints, evidence, independent handling, escalation, response, and possible remedies.
Consolidation rule The legacy page URL may remain for continuity, but its menu title should be changed from “Plagiarism and Retractions” to “Plagiarism and Data Integrity”. Retraction, correction, expression of concern, removal, and manuscript withdrawal text should not be duplicated on this page.

14. How to Report a Concern

A concern should identify the manuscript title, OJS submission identification number or published DOI, the specific material at issue, the original or comparison source, the nature of the concern, relevant page or figure numbers, and any supporting evidence. Submission-specific concerns should be communicated through the confidential OJS discussion function where possible. Published-content concerns and general reports may be submitted through the journal's official contact page.

Report an Originality or Data-Integrity Concern Multidisciplinary Journals — Universitas Dehasen Bengkulu Journal Contact Page