Allegation of research misconduct

The International Journal of Enterprise Modelling (IEIA) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity, academic honesty, and publication ethics. The journal takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously and handles them fairly, confidentially, and in accordance with established publication ethics principles.

1. Definition of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

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

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

  • Plagiarism: Using another person's ideas, words, data, figures, tables, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment.

  • Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Submitting or publishing substantially similar work without appropriate disclosure or justification.

  • Authorship Misconduct: Inappropriate attribution of authorship, including ghost authorship, gift authorship, or unauthorized changes to the author list.

  • Citation Manipulation: Inappropriately adding citations to inflate citation counts or manipulate scholarly metrics.

  • Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Failing to disclose financial, professional, or personal relationships that may influence research or editorial decisions.

  • Other Ethical Violations: Any other conduct that seriously compromises the integrity, reliability, or transparency of scholarly research and publication.

2. Reporting Allegations

Any individual who suspects research misconduct involving a manuscript submitted to or an article published in IEIA may report the concern to the journal's editorial office. Reports should provide a clear description of the suspected misconduct and, where possible, supporting evidence or relevant documentation.

Allegations should be made in good faith and supported by factual information. The journal does not tolerate knowingly false, malicious, or deliberately misleading accusations.

3. Investigation Procedure

Upon receiving an allegation, the editorial team will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the concern warrants further investigation. If necessary, the journal may:

  1. Request an explanation or supporting documentation from the author(s).

  2. Examine the manuscript, research data, similarity reports, publication records, and other relevant evidence.

  3. Consult independent experts, reviewers, institutional research integrity officers, or other appropriate authorities.

  4. Contact the author's affiliated institution or relevant research organization when serious concerns cannot be resolved through the journal's own assessment.

All parties will be given a fair opportunity to respond to the concerns, where appropriate. Decisions will be based on the available evidence and the seriousness of the alleged misconduct.

4. Confidentiality and Protection Against Retaliation

The journal will handle allegations as confidentially as reasonably possible and disclose information only to individuals who need it for assessment or investigation. The identity of complainants will be protected where feasible and consistent with a fair investigation.

The journal does not tolerate retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith. Confidentiality cannot be guaranteed in every circumstance, particularly when institutional investigation or legal obligations require disclosure.

5. Possible Outcomes and Corrective Actions

Depending on the findings, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

  • Reject the submitted manuscript.

  • Request corrections, clarification, or additional evidence.

  • Suspend or discontinue the peer-review or publication process.

  • Publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction for an already published article, where warranted.

  • Notify the author's institution, funding agency, or other relevant authority when appropriate.

  • Restrict future submissions from individuals responsible for serious or repeated misconduct, where justified and consistent with the journal's policies.

The journal will ensure that any corrective action is proportionate to the findings and supported by appropriate evidence.

6. Appeals

Authors or other affected parties may submit a written appeal against an editorial decision concerning an allegation of research misconduct. Appeals must provide relevant explanations or new evidence. The editor-in-chief or an independent editor designated by the journal will review the appeal, provided that the reviewer has no relevant conflict of interest.

7. Editorial Independence

All allegations will be assessed objectively, without discrimination or undue influence from authors, institutions, sponsors, or other interested parties. The journal aims to protect the integrity of the scholarly record while respecting the rights and responsibilities of everyone involved.

The International Journal of Enterprise Modelling (IEIA) follows recognized publication ethics principles and may refer to the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when handling allegations of research misconduct.

By submitting a manuscript to IEIA, authors agree to comply with the journal's research integrity and publication ethics policies.