Allegations of Misconduct

1. Policy Statement

Buletin Ilmiah Nagari Membangun is committed to maintaining the integrity, credibility, transparency, and ethical standards of scholarly publishing. The journal takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously, whether they concern manuscripts under consideration, articles already published, or the conduct of individuals involved in editorial and peer-review processes.

The journal's procedures for handling suspected misconduct are guided by the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including its Core Practices, relevant flowcharts, and guidance on cooperation between journals and research institutions.

All allegations will be considered fairly, confidentially, impartially, and on the basis of available evidence. An allegation alone does not establish that misconduct has occurred.

2. Scope of Research and Publication Misconduct

This policy applies to authors, co-authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and other individuals involved in the journal's publication process.

Potential misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

Fabrication and falsification: Inventing, altering, selectively reporting, or misrepresenting research findings, community engagement activities, participant information, or supporting data.
Plagiarism: Using another person's text, ideas, data, images, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate attribution.
Duplicate or redundant publication: Publishing or submitting substantially overlapping work without adequate disclosure, justification, or cross-referencing.
Authorship misconduct: Including individuals who do not qualify for authorship, excluding eligible contributors, or changing authorship without appropriate agreement.
Undisclosed conflicts of interest: Failing to disclose relationships or interests that could reasonably influence research, editorial decisions, or peer review.
Ethical violations involving participants or communities: Failing to obtain required ethical approval, permissions, or informed consent, or improperly disclosing confidential information about participants, community partners, or institutions.
Data and documentation misconduct: Misrepresenting field activities, community service outcomes, attendance records, evaluations, photographs, permissions, or other evidence supporting a manuscript.
Peer-review manipulation: Providing fabricated reviewer identities, influencing reviews improperly, breaching reviewer confidentiality, or manipulating editorial decisions.
Citation manipulation: Adding inappropriate citations primarily to increase citation counts or benefit particular individuals, journals, or institutions.
Misuse of confidential information: Disclosing or exploiting unpublished manuscripts, research data, or privileged editorial information without authorization.
Misrepresentation of funding or institutional support: Providing inaccurate information about grants, sponsors, affiliations, or the involvement of community partners.
Misuse of generative artificial intelligence: Using AI tools in ways that involve fabricated evidence, misleading attribution, undisclosed substantive contributions, or breaches of confidentiality, as further addressed in the journal's Generative AI Policy.

An honest error, a legitimate scientific disagreement, or a difference in interpretation does not automatically constitute misconduct. Such matters will be assessed according to their nature, evidence, and implications for the scholarly record.

3. Reporting Suspected Misconduct

Concerns about possible misconduct may be submitted by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, research institutions, community partners, or other interested parties.

Reports should be directed to the journal's editorial office through its official contact channels:

Journal: Buletin Ilmiah Nagari Membangun
Publisher: Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat (LPPM), Universitas Andalas
Email: nagari.lppm@unand.ac.id
Alternative email: nagari.lppm.unand@gmail.com
Journal website: https://buletinnagari.lppm.unand.ac.id/index.php/bln

To support an effective assessment, a report should, where possible, include:

The title, author names, manuscript identification number, DOI, or URL of the work concerned.
A clear description of the alleged misconduct.
Relevant documents, references, comparisons, or other supporting evidence.
The name and contact information of the person submitting the report, where they are willing to provide it.

Anonymous allegations may also be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information.

The journal will not automatically dismiss an allegation because the reporting individual wishes to remain anonymous.

4. Initial Assessment of Allegations

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately designated editor will conduct an initial assessment.

The initial assessment will seek to establish:

Whether the allegation falls within the journal's editorial or publication responsibilities.
Whether sufficient information is available to identify the manuscript, article, or conduct in question.
Whether the allegation is supported by specific, potentially verifiable evidence.
Whether an immediate precautionary editorial measure is necessary.
Whether any editor involved in handling the case has a conflict of interest.

If the allegation lacks sufficient detail, the journal may request additional information from the reporting party.

Where an allegation is outside the journal's authority, the editorial office may refer the matter to an appropriate institution or authority, subject to confidentiality and applicable requirements.

An allegation concerning an unpublished manuscript will not be resolved merely by rejecting the submission if there is a credible indication of serious misconduct requiring further action.

5. Investigation and Due Process

Where the initial assessment identifies a credible concern, the journal will undertake an appropriate editorial investigation or refer the matter to an institution with the authority and resources to investigate.

The procedure may include:

Preservation of relevant records: Retaining available manuscript versions, editorial correspondence, review reports, submitted evidence, and other relevant documentation.
Notification of the concerned party: Informing the author, reviewer, editor, or other individual of the specific concerns, where appropriate.
Opportunity to respond: Allowing the concerned party a reasonable opportunity to provide an explanation and supporting evidence.
Independent assessment: Seeking advice from an uninvolved editor or suitably qualified expert when necessary.
Institutional cooperation: Contacting relevant universities, research institutions, employers, or other responsible organizations when an investigation beyond the journal's authority is warranted.
Editorial determination: Assessing the available findings and deciding which publication-related action, if any, is justified.

The journal will distinguish between its responsibility to protect the integrity of the published record and the authority of institutions to make formal findings concerning research misconduct or employment-related disciplinary matters.

The journal will not publicly declare an individual guilty of misconduct solely on the basis of an unverified allegation.

6. Confidentiality, Fairness, and Conflicts of Interest

The journal will handle allegations with appropriate confidentiality throughout the assessment and investigation process.

Information will be shared only with individuals or organizations whose involvement is reasonably necessary to assess or resolve the matter, subject to applicable legal and institutional obligations.

All parties will be treated respectfully and fairly. The journal will avoid premature conclusions and will provide relevant individuals with an opportunity to respond.

Editors or reviewers with a personal, professional, financial, or institutional conflict of interest in a case must not participate in its substantive assessment or determination.

Where an allegation concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the matter should be referred to an appropriate independent editorial representative or the publisher, rather than being handled solely by the individual concerned.

The journal will not tolerate retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith.

7. Possible Editorial Actions

The action taken will depend on the nature of the concern, the available evidence, the stage of publication, and the potential impact on the reliability of the scholarly record.

Possible actions include:

Requesting clarification, original data, supporting documentation, or revised disclosures.
Requiring corrections to a manuscript before an editorial decision is made.
Suspending editorial consideration while serious concerns are assessed.
Rejecting a manuscript when substantiated concerns undermine its eligibility for publication.
Correcting a published article when a limited error or omission can be addressed without invalidating the overall findings.
Publishing an expression of concern when serious unresolved issues raise substantial doubts about a published article.
Retracting an article when the findings are unreliable or other circumstances justify retraction under applicable COPE guidance.
Informing relevant institutions or authorities when further investigation is warranted.
Reviewing a reviewer's or editor's continued participation in the journal's editorial processes when substantiated misconduct directly concerns those responsibilities.

These measures are not necessarily sequential. The journal will select the action appropriate to the circumstances and will avoid disproportionate responses.

A correction, expression of concern, or retraction will be implemented in accordance with the journal's Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections policy and applicable COPE guidance.

8. Allegations Involving Published Articles

Concerns raised after publication will be evaluated even when substantial time has passed since the article appeared.

The journal may request original data, field documentation, consent records, permissions, or other materials relevant to assessing the reliability of a published article.

Where the available evidence indicates that readers should be informed of a serious unresolved concern, the journal may publish an expression of concern while an investigation continues.

If a correction or retraction is warranted, the journal will issue a clearly identified and accessible notice that explains the reason for the action and links to the affected article.

The original publication record and associated notices should remain traceable, except where removal or restricted access is required for compelling legal, privacy, or safety reasons.

9. Allegations Involving Reviewers and Editors

Allegations concerning reviewers or editorial personnel will be assessed using the same principles of fairness, confidentiality, evidence, and impartiality.

Examples include:

Unauthorized use or disclosure of unpublished manuscript content.
Misappropriation of authors' ideas or data.
Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
Manipulation of review reports or editorial decisions.
Improper interference with manuscript assessment.

Where necessary, an individual whose conduct is under investigation may be excluded from handling the affected manuscript while the matter is reviewed.

Cases involving the Editor-in-Chief or another senior editorial representative must be assessed through an appropriately independent process involving the publisher or an uninvolved editorial representative.

10. Cooperation with Research Institutions

The journal recognizes that research institutions and employers generally have greater authority and capacity to investigate allegations involving research conduct, original data, institutional permissions, or the actions of their personnel.

Where appropriate, the journal may request an institutional investigation and provide relevant evidence in accordance with confidentiality requirements.

The journal may also seek updates or findings necessary to determine whether a manuscript or published article requires editorial action.

Institutional findings will be considered carefully, but decisions about corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions remain the responsibility of the journal.

11. Communication of Outcomes and Appeals

The journal will communicate relevant editorial decisions to the parties directly concerned, subject to confidentiality, privacy, and legal obligations.

Where feasible and appropriate, the person who raised a substantiated concern will be informed when the matter has been resolved, although confidential investigation details may not be disclosed.

An author or other affected individual who believes an editorial decision was based on a procedural error, overlooked evidence, or a material conflict of interest may submit a reasoned appeal through the journal's official contact channels.

Appeals should identify the decision being challenged and provide specific grounds or additional relevant evidence.

Where practicable, an appeal will be reviewed by an editor or representative who was not responsible for the original decision.

Appeals will be handled in accordance with the journal's Complaints and Appeals policy.

12. Recordkeeping and Policy Review

The journal will maintain appropriate records of allegations, evidence, correspondence, assessments, and editorial decisions, subject to applicable privacy, confidentiality, and data-retention requirements.

Records will be accessible only to authorized persons with a legitimate role in the process.

This policy should be reviewed periodically to remain consistent with developments in publication ethics, applicable regulations, and relevant COPE guidance.