ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT

Allegations of Misconduct

Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran (DIAJAR) explains on this page how it receives and assesses concerns about research integrity or publication ethics, whether the concern is raised before or after an article is published. Submitting a report starts an assessment. It does not by itself establish that misconduct has occurred.

The table below gives examples of the concerns that can be reported and the policy of the journal that applies to each of them.

Example of a concern	Applicable policy
Plagiarism, text recycling, fabricated or falsified data, manipulated images, fabricated references, or duplicate publication	Plagiarism and Research Integrity Policy
Gift, guest, or ghost authorship, and disputes about authorship	Authorship and Contributorship
An undeclared competing interest	Conflicts of Interest
Undisclosed or prohibited use of generative AI tools	Generative AI Policies
Research carried out without the required permission or consent, or a breach of the privacy of participants such as students and minors	Publication Ethics
Manipulation of the peer review process, or a breach of confidentiality by an editor or a reviewer	Publication Ethics and Peer Review Process

1. Submitting a Report

Please send your report by email to jurnal.diajar@gmail.com, and use the subject line Integrity Concern: [Article or Submission Identifier]. A report should include the following information.

The title or the identifier of the manuscript or the article that the concern is about.
A clear and specific description of the concern.
Supporting evidence, such as documents, data, or links to sources.
Any conflict of interest of the person who reports the concern, and any considerations about confidentiality.

Reports may concern authors, reviewers, editors, or the staff and managers of the journal. Please do not send sensitive personal data through unsecured channels.

2. Initial Assessment

The editorial office records every report and, where contact details are available, confirms that the report has been received. An editor who has no conflict of interest in the case decides whether the concern is within the remit of the journal, whether it contains enough detail, and whether clarification from the person who reported it is needed.

Reports are judged on their substance and not on the status of the person who submits them. An anonymous report can be assessed if it is specific and supported by information that can be verified. A report that is not supported may be closed, and it can be reconsidered if new evidence is provided.

3. Fairness, Preliminary Checks, and Referral

The persons who are the subject of a specific concern normally have the opportunity to respond, subject to safeguards that protect the process and the people involved. The journal may carry out limited preliminary checks before it contacts the parties, for example to preserve evidence or to protect research participants.

The journal may pause the editorial processing of the manuscript or the article that is concerned while a credible concern is assessed. This is a precaution and is not a finding of misconduct.

A matter that is beyond the authority of the journal may be referred to the institution of the authors, to the funder, or to another competent body.

4. Investigation and Outcomes

A case that needs closer examination is led by an editor who has no conflict of interest. The editor may consult members of the Editorial Board or independent experts. The authors and the other persons concerned are asked to explain their actions and, where relevant, to provide data, documents, or permissions. Decisions are based on the evidence and are proportionate to the seriousness of the case. The journal keeps a confidential record of the report and of the steps that were taken.

Depending on the findings, the possible outcomes are listed below.

Stage	Possible outcomes
Before publication	A request for clarification, corrected citations, or attribution. A request to rewrite or revise the manuscript. A request for data, permissions, or supporting documents. A pause of the editorial evaluation. Rejection of the manuscript when serious misconduct is established.
After publication	A correction or a corrigendum. An expression of concern while an investigation is unresolved. A retraction when the published record is substantially unreliable or when serious misconduct is proven. Notification of the institutions or the authorities concerned. Other proportionate steps to protect the scholarly record.

Actions on published articles follow the Correction and Retraction policy. Scholarly comments on a published article may also be raised through the Post Publication Discussion page.

5. Confidentiality and Protection of People Who Raise Concerns

The journal handles reports confidentially and shares information only with the people who need it to assess the concern. The identity of a person who reports a concern in good faith is kept confidential as far as possible. The journal does not accept retaliation against a person who raises a concern in good faith. A report that is knowingly false or malicious is itself a breach of publication ethics.