Allegations of Misconduct

1. Introduction

The International Journal of Advanced Science Computing and Engineering (IJASCE) is committed to maintaining the integrity of the academic record and ensuring that all scholarly work published in the journal is ethically sound. This policy addresses how IJASCE identifies, investigates, and resolves allegations of misconduct in line with the COPE Core Practices, COPE flowcharts, and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

2. Scope

This policy applies to all stakeholders involved in the publishing process, including authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and third parties such as readers or institutions who may raise concerns.

3. Policy Statement and Guidelines

IJASCE defines misconduct to include but not be limited to:

  • Fabrication or falsification of data

  • Plagiarism or unacknowledged reuse of others' work

  • Redundant or duplicate publication

  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest

  • Manipulation of the peer review process

  • Inappropriate authorship (e.g., gift or ghost authorship)

  • Misrepresentation of research ethics approval or informed consent

  • Use of AI tools in a deceptive or undisclosed manner

3.1 Reporting Allegations

Allegations may be raised by editors, reviewers, readers, or whistleblowers.
Concerns must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief or through the journal's contact page with as much detail and supporting evidence as possible.
Anonymous allegations will be considered if they are sufficiently detailed and credible.

3.2 Initial Assessment

The editorial office will assess the credibility and seriousness of the allegation.
If the concern is outside the journal’s scope or lacks substance, no further action will be taken.
If valid, an internal investigation will be initiated.

3.3 Investigation Process

Editors will follow COPE’s flowcharts and guidance.
The corresponding author will be contacted and given the opportunity to respond to the allegations.
Co-authors and, where appropriate, the author’s institution may also be contacted.
Peer reviewers and editors involved will be consulted if necessary.

3.4 Outcomes and Actions

Depending on the findings, possible actions include:

  • Correction of the published article

  • Retraction with explanation

  • Expression of concern

  • Rejection of the manuscript (if unpublished)

  • Notification to author’s institution or funding agency

  • Temporary or permanent ban on future submissions

  • Reporting to indexing and abstracting databases (if applicable)

4. Responsibilities

Authors must submit original work, ensure accurate data reporting, and disclose conflicts of interest.
Editors are responsible for initiating and conducting investigations and making final decisions.
Reviewers should report suspected misconduct during the review process.
Whistleblowers are encouraged to act in good faith and provide credible evidence.

5. Process for Handling Breaches

All cases are handled with confidentiality, fairness, and due process. The journal will protect the rights of those accused while safeguarding research integrity. Retractions and corrections will follow COPE Retraction Guidelines and be prominently labeled and linked to the original article.

6. Related Policies and References

  • COPE Core Practices

  • COPE Flowcharts for Handling Misconduct

  • IJASCE’s Peer Review Policy

  • IJASCE’s Conflict of Interest Policy

  • IJASCE’s Data and Reproducibility Policy

7. Review and Updates

This policy was last reviewed in August 2025. It is reviewed annually or as needed in response to emerging ethical issues or updates in international standards.