Allegation of Research Misconduct

Mitra Pilar: Jurnal Pendidikan, Inovasi, dan Terapan Teknologi takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously and handles them in accordance with the COPE flowcharts.

1. Forms of Misconduct

  • Fabrication: making up data, participants, test scores, or results.
  • Falsification: manipulating research materials, instruments, or processes, or changing or omitting data so that the results are not accurately represented (for example, removing classes or students without justification to obtain a significant effect).
  • Plagiarism: using the ideas, words, data, or figures of others, including one's own previous publications, without proper citation (see Plagiarism Policy).
  • Duplicate or redundant publication: submitting the same work, or substantially the same data, to more than one journal, or splitting one study into several articles without disclosure.
  • Authorship misconduct: guest, gift, or ghost authorship (see Authorship Criteria).
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest (see Conflict of Interest).
  • Citation manipulation: excessive self-citation or citation agreements intended to inflate citation metrics.
  • Peer review manipulation: suggesting fake reviewers or attempting to influence reviewers or editors.
  • Unethical treatment of research participants: conducting research with students, teachers, or schools without permission from the school, informed consent from participants, or consent from parents or guardians for participants under 18 years of age; or disclosing personal data of students (names, photographs, grades) without consent.
  • Undisclosed use of generative AI to produce data, analysis, or substantial parts of the text.

2. Reporting a Concern

Anyone may report suspected misconduct, before or after publication, by emailing mjipublisher@gmail.com (or info@mitrajurnal.co.id) with the article title, a description of the concern, and supporting evidence. The identity of the person reporting is kept confidential.

3. Investigation Procedure

  1. The Chief Editor (or another editor if the Chief Editor has a conflict of interest) reviews the report and the available evidence.
  2. If there is reasonable suspicion, the corresponding author is contacted and given an opportunity to respond, normally within 14 days.
  3. Where necessary, the journal may consult reviewers, independent experts, or the authors' institution.
  4. The decision is communicated to all authors in writing.

4. Possible Actions

  • Before publication: returning the manuscript for correction, or rejection.
  • After publication: correction, expression of concern, or retraction in accordance with the Correction and Retraction Policy.
  • Notifying the authors' institution or funder in serious cases.
  • A ban on submissions to the journal by the authors involved for up to three (3) years for serious misconduct.