Allegations of Research Misconduct

1. Policy Statement

AL MANAR: Jurnal Komunikasi dan Pendidikan Islam is committed to protecting research integrity, promoting responsible scholarly practices, and maintaining the reliability of the academic record in the fields of communication and Islamic education.

The journal addresses credible allegations of research and publication misconduct in accordance with its Publication Ethics and relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Allegations may be raised before or after publication and will be assessed fairly, objectively, confidentially, and consistently with the principles of due process.

2. Types of Research Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

Fabrication and falsification: Inventing, manipulating, or misrepresenting research data, evidence, methods, or findings.
Plagiarism and redundant publication: Using another person's work without appropriate acknowledgment or publishing substantially overlapping material without adequate disclosure and justification.
Unauthorized use or manipulation of research materials: Inappropriately using or altering data, images, interview transcripts, documents, research instruments, or other scholarly materials.
Authorship misrepresentation: Inaccurately representing intellectual contributions, including guest, gift, or ghost authorship.
Citation manipulation: Inappropriately influencing citation practices to misrepresent scholarly relevance or inflate citation metrics.
Peer-review manipulation: Interfering with the independence, authenticity, or integrity of the peer-review process.
Research-ethics violations: Seriously violating requirements concerning informed consent, participant protection, privacy, confidentiality, or other applicable ethical standards.
Undisclosed competing interests: Failing to disclose material personal, institutional, professional, or financial interests that may improperly influence research or editorial decisions.
Misuse of artificial intelligence: Using AI-generated material, fabricated references, or automated outputs in ways that misrepresent authorship, evidence, research procedures, or scholarly contributions.
Other forms of misconduct: Practices that seriously compromise the validity, transparency, or integrity of scholarly research and publication.

An allegation does not constitute proof of misconduct. Each case must be assessed on the basis of credible evidence and a fair examination of the circumstances.

3. Reporting Suspected Misconduct

Authors, reviewers, readers, editors, research institutions, and other stakeholders may report suspected misconduct through the journal's official contact page:

https://journal.staimsyk.ac.id/index.php/almanar/about/contact

Reports should identify the relevant manuscript or published article, explain the nature of the concern, and provide supporting evidence where available.

The journal may consider confidential or anonymous reports when sufficient information is provided to permit a meaningful preliminary assessment. Reports should be submitted in good faith and should not be used to harass, intimidate, or unfairly discredit authors or other individuals.

4. Preliminary Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately designated editor will conduct a preliminary assessment of the credibility, relevance, and potential seriousness of the allegation.

The assessment may include examining the manuscript or published article, reviewing editorial records and supporting evidence, identifying relevant competing interests, and determining whether further investigation is warranted.

Where necessary, the editor may request additional information from the complainant or other relevant parties.

If an allegation concerns the Editor-in-Chief or another editor directly involved in the matter, an independent editor or appropriate institutional authority should oversee the assessment to avoid conflicts of interest.

5. Investigation Procedure

When a credible concern is identified, the editorial office may request explanations, supporting documents, research records, or other relevant evidence from the individuals concerned.

Affected parties will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations and provide relevant clarification.

Where appropriate, the journal may consult independent subject experts, research-integrity officers, relevant institutions, publishers, or other journals to clarify the evidence and determine suitable action.

For research involving communication practices, Islamic education, religious communities, digital media, interviews, or other human-participant settings, the investigation may consider relevant ethical approvals, consent procedures, data protection, and the integrity of the reported research process.

Institutions ordinarily retain responsibility for formal investigations into researchers' conduct, while the journal is responsible for evaluating the reliability of the scholarly record and taking appropriate editorial action.

The journal will document relevant steps and decisions while protecting confidential information and respecting applicable legal and ethical requirements.

6. Editorial Decisions

Depending on the evidence, seriousness of the concern, and implications for the scholarly record, possible editorial actions include:

Requesting clarification, supporting evidence, or additional documentation.
Suspending manuscript evaluation while the concern is examined.
Requesting appropriate corrections or amendments before publication.
Rejecting a manuscript when misconduct or serious ethical deficiencies are established.
Referring the matter to a relevant institution or research-integrity authority.
Issuing a correction or expression of concern for a published article.
Retracting a published article when warranted.

Editorial decisions must be evidence-based and proportionate to the circumstances. They must not depend solely on similarity scores, automated recommendations, unsupported accusations, or an individual's refusal to agree with an editorial assessment.

7. Confidentiality and Fairness

AL MANAR: Jurnal Komunikasi dan Pendidikan Islam will protect confidential information and maintain appropriate records of allegations, correspondence, supporting evidence, consultations, and editorial decisions.

Information will be shared only with individuals or institutions that have a legitimate role in assessing or resolving the concern, subject to applicable legal and ethical requirements.

All parties must be treated fairly and afforded an appropriate opportunity to respond. Retaliation against individuals who report concerns in good faith is prohibited.

The journal will avoid publicly presenting unsubstantiated allegations as established misconduct and will communicate outcomes in a manner that respects confidentiality and procedural fairness.

8. Post-Publication Actions

When misconduct or serious irregularities affect a published article, AL MANAR may issue a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction, depending on the available evidence and the implications for the reliability of the scholarly record.

Editorial notices should be clearly identified, publicly accessible, dated, and linked to the affected article where technically feasible. The notice should explain the editorial action and its rationale as transparently as possible.

Retracted articles will normally remain accessible with appropriate retraction labeling to preserve the scholarly record, except where exceptional legal, ethical, or safety considerations justify removal.

These actions are intended to correct the scholarly record, inform readers, and maintain academic integrity rather than serve as punishment.

9. Complaints and Appeals

Individuals or institutions who identify a material procedural error, an unmanaged competing interest, a significant misunderstanding of the evidence, or substantial new information may request reconsideration through the journal's official contact channel.

Appeals should clearly identify the relevant editorial decision, explain the grounds for reconsideration, and provide supporting evidence where available.

Where practicable, an editor who was not responsible for the original decision should assess the appeal. The journal may seek independent advice when the matter requires additional expertise.

An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision or acceptance of a manuscript. The outcome will depend on the evidence, applicable journal policies, and the integrity of the editorial process.

10. Ethical Reference

This policy draws on relevant publication-ethics guidance, including:

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices.

https://publicationethics.org/core-practices

This policy should be read together with the journal's Publication Ethics, Peer Review Process, Conflict of Interest Policy, Plagiarism Policy, and Corrections and Retractions Policy.