Allegation of Research Misconduct

The Journal of Agriculture (JoA) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity, academic honesty, and publication ethics. The journal takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously. It is committed to handling them fairly, objectively, confidentially, and transparently, in accordance with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applicable research integrity standards.

1. Definition of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of research data, manipulation of figures or images, duplicate publication, simultaneous submission, inappropriate authorship attribution, copyright infringement, undisclosed conflicts of interest, unethical research practices, and manipulation of the peer-review or editorial process.

2. Reporting Allegations

Any individual who suspects research misconduct involving a manuscript submitted to or an article published in JoA may report the concern to the Editor-in-Chief or the editorial office through the journal's official communication channels. Reports should include a clear description of the alleged misconduct and, where available, supporting evidence such as relevant publications, manuscript comparisons, research data, or other verifiable documentation.

The journal will consider allegations submitted in good faith, regardless of the identity or professional status of the person reporting the concern. All reports will be assessed based on their content and supporting evidence.

3. Preliminary Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editorial representative will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the journal's publication ethics responsibilities and whether sufficient information is available for further examination.

The preliminary assessment may include reviewing the submitted evidence, checking relevant publications, examining similarities between texts, evaluating data or image inconsistencies, and consulting appropriate editorial or subject-matter experts. The journal will not reach a conclusion of misconduct based solely on an unverified allegation.

4. Investigation Procedure

If the preliminary assessment indicates that further investigation is warranted, the journal will take appropriate steps to examine the matter. These steps may include requesting an explanation or supporting documentation from the author(s), consulting independent experts, reviewing relevant research materials, and contacting the authors' affiliated institutions or other relevant authorities when necessary.

Authors concerned will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations and provide relevant explanations or evidence. Where the matter falls primarily within the responsibility of a research institution, the journal may refer the case to that institution for formal investigation.

The journal will conduct the process impartially and will avoid conflicts of interest in the assessment and decision-making process.

5. Confidentiality and Protection of Parties

The journal will handle allegations and investigation records confidentially to the extent reasonably possible and consistent with applicable policies and legal requirements. Information will be shared only with individuals or institutions that need it for the assessment or investigation.

The journal will respect the rights of the complainant, the author(s), reviewers, and other parties involved. The journal will not penalise individuals who raise genuine concerns in good faith about suspected misconduct. Deliberately false or malicious allegations may be addressed appropriately when supported by evidence.

6. Editorial Decisions and Corrective Actions

Following an assessment or investigation, the journal will determine the appropriate action based on the available evidence, the seriousness of the concern, and the applicable publication ethics standards.

Possible actions include:

• Rejecting a manuscript before publication.

• Requesting corrections or clarification where appropriate.

• Publishing a formal correction or an expression of concern.

• Retracting a published article when the findings justify retraction.

• Informing the authors' affiliated institution or other relevant authority.

• Taking other proportionate measures consistent with publication ethics standards.

The journal will document its decisions and the reasons for any corrective action. Where appropriate, notices of correction, expression of concern, or retraction will be linked to the affected publication to maintain the integrity and transparency of the scholarly record.

7. Appeals and Further Communication

Authors who believe that an editorial decision concerning an allegation of research misconduct was made in error may submit a reasoned appeal to the Editor-in-Chief, accompanied by relevant supporting evidence. Appeals will be considered by an appropriate editorial representative who is not directly involved in the matter, where practicable.

The journal may provide relevant updates to the parties concerned, subject to confidentiality requirements and the status of any institutional investigation.

8. Record Keeping and Policy Review

The journal will maintain appropriate records of allegations, supporting evidence, correspondence, investigation steps, decisions, and corrective actions. Access to these records will be restricted to authorised individuals.

This policy will be reviewed periodically to ensure consistency with current publication ethics guidance, applicable regulations, and the journal's commitment to responsible scholarly publishing.

9. Commitment to Publication Ethics

JoA recognises that responsible handling of research misconduct allegations is essential to maintaining trust in scholarly communication. The journal is committed to protecting the reliability of the scientific record, respecting the rights of all parties, and taking appropriate action whenever credible evidence of research misconduct is identified.