Allegation of Research Misconduct

Al Fiddhoh: Journal of Banking, Insurance, and Finance is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity, academic honesty, and publication ethics. The journal takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously and handles them fairly, confidentially, and objectively, in accordance with recognized publication ethics principles and applicable institutional policies.

1. Definition of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to, the following practices:

  • Fabrication: Inventing data, research findings, experiments, or other research information and presenting them as genuine.

  • Falsification: Manipulating research materials, procedures, data, or results, or omitting relevant information in a way that misrepresents the research.

  • Plagiarism: Using another person's ideas, words, data, or scholarly work without appropriate acknowledgment.

  • Citation manipulation: Inappropriately adding, requesting, or manipulating citations to inflate citation counts or misrepresent scholarly relevance.

  • Authorship misconduct: Improperly assigning, omitting, or misrepresenting authorship or contributor roles.

  • Duplicate publication and redundant submission: Submitting or publishing substantially overlapping work without appropriate disclosure or justification, including simultaneous submission to multiple journals.

  • Ethical violations: Conducting research without required ethical approval, consent, or appropriate safeguards for research participants, where applicable.

  • Image, data, or peer-review manipulation: Manipulating research images or data, falsifying research records, or engaging in deceptive practices intended to undermine the integrity of peer review.

Honest errors, differences in scholarly interpretation, or legitimate methodological disagreements do not automatically constitute research misconduct. Each allegation is assessed based on the available evidence and the circumstances of the case.

2. Reporting Allegations

Allegations of research misconduct may be submitted by authors, reviewers, readers, editors, institutions, or other concerned parties. Reports should include a clear description of the alleged misconduct and any supporting evidence available.

Allegations should be directed to the journal's editorial office through its official communication channels. The journal encourages individuals reporting concerns to provide sufficient information to enable an appropriate assessment.

All allegations will be treated seriously, regardless of the reporter's identity or position. However, the journal may be unable to investigate allegations that lack sufficient detail or verifiable evidence.

3. Initial Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editorial representative will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the journal's responsibility and whether sufficient information exists to proceed.

The assessment may include reviewing the submitted manuscript, published article, research data, relevant correspondence, similarity reports, ethics statements, and other supporting documentation.

Where necessary, the journal may seek advice from editorial board members, independent experts, research ethics specialists, or the relevant author's institution. An allegation alone will not be treated as proof of misconduct.

4. Investigation Procedure

If an allegation warrants further examination, the journal will initiate an appropriate investigation. Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, the procedure may include:

  • Reviewing the available evidence and identifying the specific issues requiring clarification.

  • Requesting a written explanation or supporting documentation from the corresponding author or relevant individuals.

  • Providing the individuals concerned with a reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegations.

  • Consulting independent experts or the relevant research institution when specialized assessment or formal investigation is required.

  • Evaluating the evidence impartially and documenting the basis for the editorial decision.

The journal will seek to complete the process within a reasonable period, taking into account the complexity of the case and the availability of relevant evidence.

5. Confidentiality and Protection Against Retaliation

The journal will handle allegations and related communications confidentially to the extent reasonably possible and consistent with a fair investigation. Information will be shared only with individuals who need it to assess or investigate the concern.

The journal does not presume misconduct before the evidence has been assessed. It also does not tolerate intimidation or retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith.

Reports that are knowingly false or submitted in bad faith may be addressed in accordance with applicable editorial and institutional procedures.

6. Editorial Actions and Possible Outcomes

Depending on the findings and the stage of the publication process, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

  • Reject a manuscript when serious concerns about its integrity remain unresolved.

  • Request corrections, additional documentation, data verification, or clarification where appropriate.

  • Suspend editorial processing while a material concern is being investigated.

  • Publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction when warranted.

  • Notify the relevant author's institution, research funder, or other appropriate body when the circumstances justify such notification.

  • Restrict further editorial consideration of submissions where serious or repeated misconduct has been established, in accordance with the journal's policies.

Any action will be proportionate to the nature and severity of the misconduct and supported by the available evidence. Retractions and post-publication notices will be handled in accordance with recognized publication ethics guidance.

7. Allegations Involving Published Articles

Allegations concerning articles already published in Al Fiddhoh will be assessed using the same principles of fairness, confidentiality, and evidence-based decision-making.

Where concerns may affect the reliability or integrity of a published article, the journal may contact the authors, seek institutional clarification, or consult independent experts. If immediate clarification is necessary to protect the scholarly record while an investigation is ongoing, the journal may publish an expression of concern.

If the investigation establishes that an article contains serious errors or misconduct that undermine its reliability, the journal may issue a correction or retract the article, depending on the circumstances. Retraction does not necessarily imply that every author was involved in or aware of the misconduct.

8. Responsibilities of Authors and Institutions

Authors are expected to cooperate with reasonable editorial inquiries concerning the integrity of their manuscripts and published articles. They may be asked to provide research data, methodological documentation, ethical approval records, or other relevant evidence, subject to applicable legal, ethical, confidentiality, and data-protection requirements.

When a formal institutional investigation is necessary, the journal may refer the matter to the appropriate institution or research ethics body. The journal's editorial assessment and the institution's investigation may proceed independently, according to their respective responsibilities.

9. Policy Review and Ethical Standards

Al Fiddhoh is committed to protecting the integrity of the scholarly record and improving its publication ethics procedures. This policy is informed by recognized publication ethics principles, including guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The journal reserves the right to take appropriate action in response to suspected or confirmed research misconduct, consistent with the evidence, applicable regulations, and relevant publication ethics guidance.