Research Misconduct Policy
Research Misconduct Policy
What counts as misconduct, how an allegation is investigated, and what happens if it is upheld. Honest error is not misconduct — the difference is intent, and the process is built around establishing it fairly.
Last reviewed August 2026 · Applies to all submissions to JMVRA (ISSN 2984-8911)
Research misconduct is fabrication, falsification or plagiarism in proposing, performing or reviewing research, or in reporting its results. It does not include honest error or honest differences of scientific opinion. That distinction is the heart of this policy: a researcher who makes a mistake and corrects it is doing science properly, and must not be treated as though they had cheated.
The Three Core Categories
Fabrication
Making up data or results and recording or reporting them. The experiment did not happen, or did not produce what is reported.
Falsification
Manipulating materials, equipment or processes, or changing or omitting data so the research is not accurately represented — including selective removal of inconvenient outliers.
Plagiarism
Appropriating another person’s ideas, processes, results or words without credit. Detailed in the Plagiarism Policy.
Also Treated as Misconduct
| Conduct | Description |
|---|---|
| Image manipulation | Splicing gel lanes, duplicating or reusing images across figures or papers, or selectively adjusting parts of an image. |
| Duplicate submission | Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously, or republishing work already published without disclosure. |
| Authorship abuse | Gift, ghost or guest authorship, or trading authorship positions. See the Authorship Policy. |
| Peer review manipulation | Supplying fabricated reviewer identities or contact addresses the author controls. |
| Citation manipulation | Adding citations that serve no scholarly purpose in order to inflate a metric. |
| Undisclosed conflict | Concealing an interest a reader would reasonably expect to know about. See the Conflict of Interest Policy. |
| Ethics breach | Conducting research without required approval or informed consent. |
| Paper mills | Buying, selling or commissioning manuscripts, authorship slots or fabricated datasets. |
How an Allegation Is Handled
Principles of the Process
- Presumption of good faith. An allegation is a question to be answered, not a finding. Authors are treated as having acted honestly until evidence shows otherwise.
- The evidence is disclosed. Authors are shown what is alleged and on what basis. Nobody is asked to answer a case they cannot see.
- Confidentiality until conclusion. The matter is not discussed publicly, and the complainant’s identity is not disclosed to the authors without consent.
- Institutions investigate researchers. A journal can assess a manuscript; only an employer can investigate laboratory records and interview staff. Serious findings are referred.
- Proportionate outcomes. A first, minor, self-corrected lapse is not treated like sustained deliberate fabrication.
- The right of appeal under the Complaints & Appeals Policy.
Consequences Where an Allegation Is Upheld
- Manuscript under review: rejected, and not reconsidered.
- Published paper: retracted, with a public notice stating the reason.
- The institution is informed, with the evidence, so it can take whatever action falls to it.
- Future submissions from the authors involved may be declined for a defined period.
- Co-authors are assessed individually. Someone who had no knowledge of the misconduct is not treated as though they did.
- Publication charges are not refunded where the paper is withdrawn for misconduct.
Reporting a Concern
Email [email protected] with the paper title or DOI, what you believe is wrong, and the evidence — a side-by-side comparison, the original source, the data, or annotated images. Specific, checkable reports can be acted on; general suspicion cannot. Reports made in good faith are treated confidentially, and nothing in this policy is used against someone who raises a concern that turns out to be unfounded.
Where the Research Misconduct Policy Applies
The stages of a paper’s journey this policy governs are highlighted.
Applies at: Review · Publish · After
Research Misconduct Policy in Brief
Research misconduct covers fabrication, falsification and plagiarism, along with practices such as image manipulation, duplicate publication and paper-mill manuscripts. Honest error is not misconduct; the difference is intent.
Allegations are handled confidentially, following COPE guidance, and the authors are given a full opportunity to respond. Where misconduct is upheld, outcomes can include rejection, retraction and notification of the authors’ institution.
