Allegation of Research Misconduct

Islamic Accounting Journal (IAJ) is committed to upholding the integrity of the scholarly record. The journal follows the guidelines and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in handling any allegation of research or publication misconduct, whether it concerns a submitted manuscript or a published article.

1. Forms of Misconduct

Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

  • Fabrication: making up data or results and reporting them.
  • Falsification: manipulating research materials, data, or processes so that the research is not accurately represented.
  • Plagiarism: using another person's ideas, data, or words without proper attribution, including self-plagiarism or text recycling.
  • Duplicate or redundant publication: submitting or publishing the same work in more than one journal.
  • Authorship disputes: gift, ghost, or guest authorship, or omitting a legitimate contributor.
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest that may influence the research or its interpretation.
  • Citation manipulation and peer review manipulation.
  • Unethical research practices, including the absence of required ethical approval or informed consent.

2. How to Report an Allegation

Anyone, whether an author, reviewer, editor, reader, or institution, may report suspected misconduct by email to the Editor-in-Chief at [email protected]. A report should include:

  • The title of the manuscript or article, along with its DOI or URL if published;
  • A clear description of the alleged misconduct;
  • Supporting evidence, such as original sources, comparison documents, or data.

Anonymous reports will be considered if they contain sufficient and verifiable evidence.

3. Handling Procedure

  1. Preliminary assessment: the Editor-in-Chief evaluates whether the allegation is substantiated and within the journal's remit.
  2. Author response: the corresponding author is informed of the concern and given the opportunity to provide an explanation.
  3. Investigation: if the response is unsatisfactory, the editorial board conducts a further investigation and may consult independent experts.
  4. Institutional involvement: where necessary, the journal contacts the author's institution or relevant authority for further investigation.
  5. Decision: the editor makes a final decision based on the evidence and COPE guidance.

4. Possible Outcomes

  • Rejection of the manuscript (for submissions under review);
  • Publication of a correction (erratum/corrigendum);
  • Publication of an expression of concern;
  • Retraction of the article, following the COPE Retraction Guidelines;
  • Notification to the author's institution and/or a temporary ban on future submissions.

5. Confidentiality and Fairness

All allegations are handled confidentially, fairly, and promptly. The identity of the person reporting is protected, and authors are presumed innocent until misconduct is established through due process.