Allegation of Research Misconduct

RETIPA (Riset Teknologi Pangan dan Hasil Pertanian) is committed to maintaining research integrity, publication ethics, and responsible scholarly communication. The journal takes allegations of research misconduct seriously and handles them fairly, confidentially, and objectively.

1. Definition of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct refers to violations of responsible research and publication practices, including but not limited to:

  • Fabrication: Making up research data, results, or findings and presenting them as genuine.

  • Falsification: Manipulating research materials, processes, data, or results in a way that misrepresents the research.

  • Plagiarism: Using another person's ideas, words, data, or intellectual work without appropriate acknowledgment.

  • Duplicate or redundant publication: Publishing substantially overlapping work without appropriate disclosure.

  • Authorship misconduct: Inappropriately assigning, omitting, or misrepresenting authorship.

  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest: Failing to disclose relevant interests that may affect the research or its publication.

  • Other ethical violations: Serious breaches of research ethics, publication ethics, or applicable institutional requirements.

Honest errors, differences in scientific interpretation, or disagreements about research findings do not automatically constitute research misconduct.

2. Reporting Allegations

Allegations of research misconduct may be submitted to the editorial team by authors, reviewers, readers, research institutions, or other concerned parties.

Reports should provide sufficient information to identify the manuscript or published article and describe the suspected misconduct. Supporting documents or other relevant evidence should be provided where available.

The editorial team may request additional information when necessary to assess the allegation. Reports will be handled as confidentially as circumstances permit.

3. Initial Assessment and Investigation

Upon receiving an allegation, the editor or designated editorial representative will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the journal's responsibility and whether further action is warranted.

The assessment may include:

  • Reviewing the manuscript, published article, research data, references, and relevant supporting materials.

  • Requesting an explanation or clarification from the authors or other relevant parties.

  • Examining available evidence of potential data manipulation, plagiarism, inappropriate authorship, or other ethical violations.

  • Consulting independent experts or the authors' affiliated institutions when appropriate.

RETIPA does not currently use dedicated plagiarism-detection software. Allegations involving plagiarism or text overlap are therefore assessed using available evidence and manual examination where appropriate.

4. Actions and Editorial Decisions

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the allegation and the evidence available, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

  • Request clarification, supporting documents, or research data from the authors.

  • Require corrections or revisions before publication.

  • Reject a manuscript when serious concerns remain unresolved.

  • Publish a correction or an expression of concern for a published article when warranted.

  • Retract a published article when the evidence supports retraction.

  • Contact the relevant institution, research organization, or other appropriate authority when necessary.

The journal will consider the authors' responses and relevant evidence before making an editorial decision, where circumstances permit. Editorial action will be proportionate to the nature of the findings.

5. Cooperation with Institutions

When an allegation requires an investigation beyond the journal's authority or available resources, RETIPA may refer the matter to the relevant institution or organization for further examination.

The journal may consider the findings of such investigations when determining appropriate editorial action. The journal's editorial process does not replace formal institutional investigations into research misconduct.

6. Confidentiality and Protection Against Retaliation

The editorial team will make reasonable efforts to protect the confidentiality of individuals involved in a misconduct allegation, subject to the requirements of a fair assessment and any applicable obligations.

Allegations should be submitted in good faith. Knowingly false or malicious allegations may themselves raise ethical concerns. Individuals who raise concerns in good faith should not be subjected to retaliation by the journal.

7. Records and Follow-up

The editorial team will maintain appropriate records of allegations, relevant communications, evidence reviewed, and decisions made, subject to applicable confidentiality requirements.

Where corrective action is necessary, the journal will ensure that the action is communicated through appropriate editorial channels and, when relevant, clearly linked to the affected publication.

RETIPA is committed to addressing research misconduct allegations consistently and responsibly to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.