Allegation of Research Misconduct

Allegation of Research Misconduct

Environmental Engineering Journal ITATS (ENVITATS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity, scientific credibility, transparency, and publication ethics.

The Editorial Board of ENVITATS takes all allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously and handles them in accordance with the principles and guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

This policy applies to manuscripts under submission, manuscripts accepted for publication, published articles, and the activities of authors, reviewers, editors, and other parties involved in the publication process.

ENVITATS is committed to ensuring that allegations are assessed objectively, confidentially, fairly, and on the basis of verifiable evidence. An allegation alone does not constitute proof of misconduct.

1. What Counts as Research Misconduct

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

  • Fabrication: Inventing or creating research data, experimental results, observations, measurements, or other scientific information that did not actually exist or were not obtained through the reported research procedures.

  • Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, procedures, data, images, or results in a manner that misrepresents the actual findings.

  • Plagiarism: Using another person's ideas, text, research findings, data, figures, or intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment or attribution.

  • Self-Plagiarism and Redundant Publication: Reusing substantial portions of previously published work without appropriate disclosure, citation, or justification, or publishing substantially identical research findings in multiple publications.

  • Duplicate or Simultaneous Submission: Submitting the same or substantially similar manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously without appropriate disclosure.

  • Authorship Misconduct: Including individuals who do not qualify for authorship, excluding legitimate contributors, changing authorship without appropriate consent, or engaging in ghost, guest, or gift authorship.

  • Citation and Reference Manipulation: Fabricating references, deliberately misrepresenting cited sources, or manipulating citations to artificially influence citation metrics.

  • Unethical Use of Artificial Intelligence: Using generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in ways that violate the journal's Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy, including undisclosed substantive AI use where disclosure is required, fabricated references, or AI-generated scientific findings presented as authentic research.

  • Research Ethics Violations: Conducting research without required ethical approvals, permissions, informed consent, or compliance with applicable research standards.

  • Peer-Review Manipulation: Attempting to influence, falsify, or interfere with the peer-review process through fabricated reviewer identities, undisclosed conflicts of interest, unauthorized communications, or other deceptive practices.

  • Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Failing to disclose financial, institutional, professional, or personal relationships that could materially influence the research or publication process.

  • Misuse of Confidential Information: Unauthorized disclosure or exploitation of unpublished manuscripts, research data, confidential reviewer reports, or editorial correspondence.

Research Misconduct in Environmental Engineering

ENVITATS places particular emphasis on the integrity and reliability of environmental engineering research, including experimental studies, laboratory investigations, field measurements, environmental monitoring, modeling, and simulation.

Examples of potential misconduct include:

  • Fabricating water, air, or soil quality measurements;

  • Altering wastewater treatment performance or pollutant removal efficiency data;

  • Manipulating laboratory test results or environmental monitoring records;

  • Misrepresenting sampling locations, procedures, or experimental conditions;

  • Presenting synthetic or simulated data as actual field observations without appropriate disclosure;

  • Manipulating geographic information systems (GIS), satellite imagery, photographs, or other scientific visualizations to misrepresent environmental conditions; and

  • Selectively reporting experimental or modeling results in a deliberately misleading manner.

The Editorial Board evaluates such concerns according to their nature, scientific significance, available evidence, and potential effects on the reliability of the research.

2. How to Report an Allegation

Anyone, including readers, authors, reviewers, editors, research institutions, and other interested parties, may report suspected research or publication misconduct involving manuscripts or articles published by ENVITATS.

Allegations should be submitted in writing to the ENVITATS Editorial Office through the following email address:

Editorial Office of ENVITATS

Email: [email protected]

Reports should include, whenever possible:

  1. The title of the manuscript or published article concerned;

  2. The names of the authors and relevant publication details;

  3. The article's DOI or permanent URL, if available;

  4. A clear description of the suspected misconduct;

  5. Supporting evidence, such as relevant documents, datasets, figures, publications, or correspondence; and

  6. Contact information for follow-up communication, where appropriate.

Reports should be factual, specific, and supported by verifiable information.

Anonymous allegations may be considered when they contain sufficiently detailed and credible evidence to allow an objective preliminary assessment.

The journal will protect the identity of individuals reporting concerns to the extent reasonably possible, subject to applicable legal obligations and the requirements of a fair investigation.

All allegations will be handled seriously and without inappropriate discrimination, retaliation, or prejudgment.

3. Handling of Allegations

ENVITATS follows a structured procedure for assessing and responding to allegations of research misconduct.

3.1. Initial Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor conducts a preliminary assessment to determine whether the concern is credible, sufficiently supported, and relevant to the journal's research integrity or publication ethics policies.

The initial assessment may involve examining the manuscript, published article, supporting documents, originality reports, research data, or other available evidence.

Editors who have a conflict of interest concerning the allegation must not participate in its assessment or decision-making process.

If the allegation concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the matter should be referred to another independent authorized editorial representative or the journal's publisher.

3.2. Request for Explanation

When an allegation warrants further assessment, the editorial team will notify the corresponding author or other relevant parties of the concern.

The author may be requested to provide:

  • A written explanation addressing the allegation;

  • Original research data or relevant supporting documentation;

  • Laboratory records, field measurement records, or analytical results;

  • Information regarding research methods and data processing;

  • Relevant ethical approvals or research permissions;

  • Evidence of appropriate source attribution or copyright authorization; and

  • Other information reasonably necessary to evaluate the concern.

Authors must be given a reasonable opportunity to respond before an editorial determination is made.

No final conclusion regarding misconduct shall be reached solely on the basis of an unverified allegation.

3.3. Editorial Evaluation and Investigation

When further examination is necessary, the Editor-in-Chief may consult the Editorial Board, independent scientific experts, reviewers, or other qualified parties.

Relevant evaluation methods may include:

  • Similarity and plagiarism screening;

  • Verification of references and citations;

  • Examination of scientific figures and images;

  • Assessment of research methods and statistical analyses;

  • Verification of laboratory, field, or environmental monitoring data; and

  • Evaluation of possible violations of publication ethics.

Automated similarity scores or AI-detection results alone shall not be considered conclusive evidence of misconduct.

The journal's assessment focuses on determining whether the concerns affect the editorial decision or the reliability and integrity of the published scholarly record.

3.4. Institutional Involvement

When allegations involve serious research misconduct, such as data fabrication, falsification, unethical research practices, or unresolved authorship disputes, ENVITATS may refer the matter to the authors' affiliated institutions, research integrity offices, funding organizations, or other competent authorities.

The relevant institution may be responsible for conducting a formal investigation into the conduct of its researchers.

ENVITATS will cooperate with legitimate institutional investigations by providing relevant evidence and editorial records, subject to confidentiality and applicable legal requirements.

The journal retains responsibility for making appropriate publication decisions and safeguarding the integrity of its published articles.

3.5. Editorial Decision and Documentation

Following the assessment and consideration of available evidence and responses, the Editor-in-Chief or authorized independent editor determines the appropriate editorial action.

The decision should consider:

  • The credibility and sufficiency of the evidence;

  • The seriousness and nature of the concern;

  • The authors' explanations and supporting documentation;

  • Findings from relevant experts or institutions;

  • The potential impact on the scientific validity of the research; and

  • Applicable publication ethics guidelines.

The editorial office maintains appropriate records of allegations, correspondence, supporting evidence, evaluations, and final decisions.

4. Possible Outcomes

Depending on the nature, severity, and substantiation of the allegation, ENVITATS may take one or more of the following actions:

  • No Further Action: When an allegation is unsupported or the available evidence does not establish a publication integrity concern.

  • Request for Clarification or Revision: When identified concerns can be adequately resolved through explanation, additional documentation, or manuscript revision.

  • Manuscript Rejection: When a manuscript under consideration fails to meet the journal's standards of originality, scientific integrity, or publication ethics.

  • Withdrawal from the Publication Process: When an accepted but unpublished manuscript contains unresolved concerns that prevent publication.

  • Publication of a Correction: When a published article contains errors that can be corrected without invalidating its principal findings or conclusions.

  • Expression of Concern: When serious questions regarding the integrity or reliability of a published article remain unresolved and readers should be informed.

  • Article Retraction: When sufficient evidence demonstrates that the published findings or conclusions are unreliable or that serious publication integrity violations warrant retraction.

  • Institutional Notification: When substantiated concerns require examination by the authors' institution, research integrity office, funding organization, or other relevant authority.

Any correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction will be handled in accordance with the journal's Plagiarism & Retraction Policy and applicable COPE guidelines.

The Editorial Board may also consider additional proportionate editorial measures in cases of serious or repeated violations, subject to applicable institutional policies and appropriate procedural safeguards.

Editorial action will not be determined solely by similarity percentages, automated detection tools, personal allegations, or institutional reputation.

5. Confidentiality, Fairness, and Good Faith

ENVITATS is committed to handling allegations of research misconduct confidentially, impartially, and in good faith.

Information relating to allegations and investigations will be shared only with individuals or institutions who have a legitimate role in evaluating or resolving the concern.

All parties involved are expected to:

  • Respect the confidentiality of unpublished manuscripts and research data;

  • Avoid disclosing unverified allegations to unauthorized parties;

  • Provide accurate information and supporting evidence;

  • Cooperate with reasonable editorial inquiries;

  • Disclose relevant conflicts of interest;

  • Refrain from retaliating against individuals who raise concerns in good faith; and

  • Respect the rights of authors and other parties to respond fairly to allegations.

Individuals who report concerns honestly and on reasonable grounds will not be penalized merely because an allegation is ultimately unsubstantiated.

Knowingly fabricated, deliberately misleading, or malicious allegations may themselves constitute an ethical concern and may be referred to the appropriate authority.

The journal will seek to protect all parties from unnecessary reputational harm while ensuring that legitimate concerns are appropriately addressed.

6. Appeals and Reconsideration

Authors or other directly affected parties who believe that an editorial decision concerning an allegation was based on a material factual error or procedural irregularity may submit a written request for reconsideration to the Editorial Office.

Requests should identify the contested decision and provide relevant reasons or supporting evidence.

Where appropriate, the request will be reviewed by an editor or editorial representative who was not directly responsible for the original decision.

The journal may consult independent experts or its publisher when necessary.

A request for reconsideration does not automatically reverse, suspend, or invalidate an editorial decision.

7. Relationship with Other Editorial Policies

This policy should be read in conjunction with the following ENVITATS policies:

  • Publication Ethics;

  • Plagiarism & Retraction Policy;

  • Peer Review Process;

  • Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy; and

  • Copyright and Licensing Policy.

When misconduct concerns involve multiple policies, the Editorial Board will coordinate its assessment to ensure consistent, fair, and transparent handling.

8. Policy Implementation and Updates

This policy shall become effective following its formal approval and publication by the ENVITATS Editorial Board.

ENVITATS reserves the right to review and update this policy in response to developments in publication ethics, research integrity standards, applicable regulations, and scholarly publishing practices.

All authors, reviewers, editors, and other relevant parties are expected to familiarize themselves with and comply with this policy.

The journal is committed to continuously improving its research integrity procedures and maintaining public confidence in its published scientific literature.

References and Ethical Guidelines

This policy is informed by the following resources:

  1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices: Allegations of Misconduct. https://publicationethics.org

  2. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME. Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12

  3. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Cooperation Between Research Institutions and Journals on Research Integrity Cases.

  4. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/

Environmental Engineering Journal ITATS (ENVITATS)

Editorial Board

Institut Teknologi Adhi Tama Surabaya (ITATS), Indonesia