Allegation of Research Misconduct

The ADI Journal of Community Service (ADIMAS) is committed to maintaining the integrity, transparency, and reliability of scholarly publishing. ADIMAS takes allegations of research misconduct seriously and is committed to handling all concerns fairly, confidentially, and objectively. This policy applies to manuscripts submitted to the journal and articles that have already been published.

The Editorial Team follows the principles and relevant guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when assessing allegations of research and publication misconduct. All allegations will be evaluated based on the available evidence, the seriousness of the concern, and the potential impact on the integrity of the scholarly record.

Definition of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct refers to actions that compromise the credibility, originality, reliability, or ethical integrity of research and community service publications. Such misconduct may occur during the planning, implementation, evaluation, documentation, analysis, or reporting of research and community service activities.

Allegations may involve, but are not limited to, the following forms of misconduct:

  1. Fabrication: Inventing data, participant responses, interviews, activities, evaluation results, or other research or community service findings and presenting them as genuine.
  2. Falsification: Manipulating research materials, procedures, data, photographs, documentation, evaluation results, or other evidence so that the reported findings do not accurately represent the activities performed.
  3. Plagiarism: Using another person's ideas, words, data, images, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment or attribution.
  4. Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Publishing substantially overlapping work without appropriate disclosure, justification, or acknowledgment of the previous publication.
  5. Authorship Misconduct: Misrepresenting contributions, including the inappropriate inclusion or omission of authors, fictitious authorship, or other serious authorship irregularities.
  6. Citation Manipulation: Adding irrelevant references or manipulating citations to improperly influence citation metrics or misrepresent the scholarly basis of a work.
  7. Research Ethics Violations: Conducting or reporting activities involving human participants without required consent, appropriate ethical approval where applicable, or adequate protection of participants' privacy and welfare.
  8. Misrepresentation of Community Service Activities: Falsely reporting the implementation, location, date, number of participants, partner involvement, program outcomes, or community impact of an activity.
  9. Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Concealing relevant financial, professional, personal, or institutional interests that could improperly influence the work or its evaluation.
  10. Other Serious Publication Irregularities: Practices that undermine the integrity of the research or publication process, including manipulation of peer review or the submission of materially misleading information.

Honest errors, differences in scholarly interpretation, and methodological limitations do not automatically constitute research misconduct. Such matters will be assessed according to their nature, evidence, and effect on the reliability of the published work.

Reporting Allegations

Any individual who has a reasonable concern regarding possible research or publication misconduct in an ADIMAS submission or published article may report the concern to the Editorial Team through the journal's official contact channels. Reports may be submitted by authors, reviewers, readers, researchers, community partners, or other parties with relevant information.

To facilitate an appropriate assessment, a report should include the following information where available:

  • The title, author(s), and publication details of the manuscript or article concerned.
  • A clear description of the suspected misconduct.
  • Relevant evidence or supporting documentation, such as publication links, comparative text, data discrepancies, or inconsistencies in activity documentation.
  • Any additional information that may help the Editorial Team assess the concern fairly.

Reports should be made in good faith and supported by specific information whenever possible. The Editorial Team will not presume that an allegation is proven merely because it has been submitted. Allegations will be assessed objectively, and all relevant parties will be treated fairly.

Assessment and Investigation Procedure

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editorial Team will assess the information and determine the appropriate course of action. The procedure may include the following stages:

  1. Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor will review the allegation to determine whether it falls within the scope of this policy and whether sufficient information is available for further assessment.
  2. Evidence Verification: The Editorial Team may examine the manuscript, publication records, similarity reports, data, figures, photographs, activity documentation, ethical statements, or other relevant materials.
  3. Request for Explanation: Where appropriate, the corresponding author will be contacted and given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the concerns and provide supporting information on behalf of the author team.
  4. Further Consultation: If necessary, the Editorial Team may consult independent experts, reviewers, research ethics specialists, or the relevant author's institution to obtain additional information.
  5. Editorial Evaluation: The available evidence and responses will be evaluated impartially to determine whether the concern is substantiated, requires correction, or cannot be resolved with the available information.
  6. Decision and Follow-up: The Editorial Team will determine appropriate editorial action based on the findings and the seriousness of the issue.

The scope and duration of an assessment will depend on the complexity of the case, the availability of evidence, and the need for consultation with external parties. The Editorial Team will seek to handle cases promptly without compromising fairness or the quality of the assessment.

Confidentiality and Fair Treatment

Allegations will be handled confidentially to the extent reasonably possible and consistent with a fair assessment, applicable ethical obligations, and relevant legal requirements. Information will be shared only with individuals who need it for the assessment or investigation.

The identity of a complainant will be protected where reasonably possible. However, absolute anonymity or confidentiality cannot be guaranteed in every case, particularly when disclosure is necessary for a fair investigation. Anonymous reports may be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information.

Individuals accused of misconduct will be informed of the substantive concerns and given a reasonable opportunity to respond before an adverse editorial conclusion is reached, except where immediate action is necessary to protect the scholarly record or address another urgent ethical concern.

ADIMAS does not tolerate retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith. Deliberately false or malicious allegations may be addressed appropriately when supported by evidence.

Role of Authors and Research Institutions

Authors are expected to cooperate with reasonable editorial inquiries and provide relevant explanations, records, or supporting documentation when requested. The corresponding author may be asked to coordinate the response on behalf of all co-authors.

Where an allegation requires a formal institutional investigation, ADIMAS may contact the relevant university, research organization, employer, community service institution, or other appropriate authority. The institution may be asked to investigate the matter in accordance with its own research integrity procedures and communicate relevant findings to the journal.

ADIMAS recognizes that formal investigations into individual research misconduct are generally the responsibility of the relevant institutions or competent authorities. The journal remains responsible for determining whether editorial action is needed to protect the accuracy and integrity of its published record.

Editorial Actions and Outcomes

Editorial action will depend on the nature of the concern, the strength of the available evidence, and the potential impact on the integrity of the scholarly record. Possible actions include:

  • Requesting clarification or additional documentation from the author(s).
  • Rejecting a submitted manuscript when serious misconduct is established through the editorial assessment.
  • Requesting corrections or additional disclosures when the issue can be appropriately resolved without invalidating the work.
  • Publishing a formal correction or clarification for a published article when necessary.
  • Publishing an Expression of Concern when significant concerns remain unresolved or an investigation is ongoing and readers need to be informed.
  • Retracting a published article when the findings are unreliable or other grounds for retraction are established in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policy.
  • Referring the matter to the relevant institution or appropriate authority when further investigation is required.

Editorial actions will be proportionate to the findings. Retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record and alert readers to unreliable work, rather than to serve as a punishment. Where a correction, concern notice, or retraction is published, the notice will be linked to the original article where applicable.

Commitment to Research Integrity

ADIMAS is committed to protecting the credibility of research and community service publications. By responding responsibly to allegations of misconduct, the journal seeks to ensure that reported community activities, participant data, evaluation results, and claims of community impact are presented accurately and ethically.

This policy will be applied consistently with the journal's other publication ethics policies and relevant COPE guidance. Through fair assessment, appropriate institutional cooperation, and transparent editorial action, ADIMAS aims to maintain trust in scholarly communication and promote responsible community engagement.