Allegation of Research Misconduct

EnJourMe (English Journal of Merdeka): Culture, Language, and Teaching of English is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and academic integrity. The journal takes all allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously and follows the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when responding to reports of improper practices.

1. What is Research Misconduct?

Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

• Plagiarism: The appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

• Fabrication and Falsification: Making up data or results and recording or reporting them (fabrication), or manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing/omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the record (falsification).

• Duplicate or Redundant Submission/Publication: Submitting the same manuscript concurrently to multiple journals or publishing substantially similar work without proper cross-referencing and justification.

• Citation Manipulation: Excessive or inappropriate self-citation or orchestrated agreement among authors to cite each other’s work artificially to boost citation counts.

• Authorship Misconduct: Inclusion of guest, gift, or ghost authors, or omitting individuals who made substantial contributions to the research.

• Unrevealed Conflicts of Interest: Failure to disclose financial, personal, or professional relationships that could bias the research or its reporting.

2. Reporting Misconduct

Anyone (readers, authors, reviewers, or editors) who suspects research or publication misconduct in any submitted or published manuscript in EnJourMe is encouraged to report it immediately.

Reports should be submitted in writing to the Editorial Office via email at [email protected] with the subject line: "Allegation of Misconduct - [Manuscript ID / Title]".

To help us investigate effectively, the report should include:

• The title, author(s), and publication details (or manuscript ID) of the work in question.

• A detailed explanation of the specific misconduct alleged.

• Supporting evidence or documentation (e.g., side-by-side text comparisons for plagiarism, original data discrepancies, or links to overlapping publications).

3. Investigation Process

Upon receiving an allegation, the Chief Editor, in consultation with the Editorial Board, will initiate a formal investigation following COPE flowcharts and protocols:

• Initial Assessment: The Editorial Board will review the allegation and supporting evidence to determine whether there is sufficient cause to launch a formal inquiry.

• Communication with Parties: If the complaint warrants investigation, the Editor will contact the accused author(s) with the details of the allegation, allowing them a reasonable period (typically 14–30 days) to provide a explanation and supporting evidence.

• Inquiry and Decision: The Editorial Board will evaluate the responses. If necessary, external independent experts or the authors' home institution may be consulted.

• Resolution: If misconduct is substantiated, EnJourMe will take appropriate actions proportional to the severity of the offense.

4. Corrective Actions and Sanctions

If misconduct is proven, EnJourMe may apply one or more of the following measures:

• Rejection of the submitted manuscript if it is still under review.

• Formal letter of reprimand issued to the author(s).

• Publication of a formal Correction/Corrigendum or Expression of Concern in the journal.

• Formal Retraction of the published article in accordance with COPE Retraction Guidelines.

• Temporary or permanent ban on future submissions from the author(s) to EnJourMe.

• Reporting the misconduct to the author's institution, funding body, or relevant professional bodies.

5. Confidentiality and Protection

All allegations will be handled with strict confidentiality to protect the privacy of both the whistleblower and the accused, until a formal resolution is reached. Whistleblowers will be protected against retaliation, provided the allegations are made in good faith. Anonymous complaints will be considered if accompanied by clear and verifiable evidence.