Allegations of Misconduct

Basrah Journal for Engineering Sciences (BJES) expects high standards of research integrity and ethical behaviour from all authors, reviewers and editors. This section describes how BJES will handle allegations of misconduct, including both pre- and post-publication issues.

1. Definition of misconduct
Misconduct includes (but is not limited to) the following:

  • Plagiarism: presenting another person’s ideas, text, data or images as one’s own, without appropriate attribution.

  • Data fabrication or falsification: inventing or manipulating data, results, or images, or omitting results in order to mislead.

  • Duplicate or redundant publication: submitting or publishing the same work (or substantially overlapping work) in more than one journal without proper disclosure.

  • Inappropriate authorship: including individuals as authors who did not make a significant contribution, or excluding those who did contribute; guest or ghost authorship.

  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest: failing to declare relationships or funding that could influence the research or its interpretation.

  • Manipulation of the peer-review or editorial process: e.g., falsified reviewer identities, unethical influence on reviewers or editors.

  • Any other breach of applicable ethical or legal standards (human/animal research ethics, copyright violation, etc.).

2. Reporting allegations

  • Any person (author, reviewer, reader, editor, institution) who becomes aware of possible misconduct in a manuscript submitted to BJES, or an article already published in BJES, should raise the concern promptly by contacting the Editor-in-Chief (or designated ethics contact) of the journal.

  • Reports should preferably be in writing (email or letter) and include: the article or manuscript ID/title; the alleged misconduct; any supporting evidence (e.g., plagiarism similarity report, data inconsistencies, image duplication) and contact information of the complainant (though anonymous reports may also be considered if sufficient evidence is provided).

  • The journal treats all such allegations seriously and will respect confidentiality of the complainant and the accused, insofar as permitted by law and institutional policy.

3. Preliminary assessment and investigation

  • After receiving a valid allegation, the Editor-in-Chief (or delegate) will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the allegation is credible and relevant to BJES.

  • If the case warrants further investigation, the journal will initiate a formal investigation, which may include:

    • Requesting detailed explanation from the corresponding author(s).

    • Requesting raw data, research documentation, peer-review correspondence or other relevant material.

    • Consulting editorial board members, external experts, or the author’s institution as appropriate.

  • Throughout the investigation the process must be fair, impartial, timely, and documented. Confidentiality must be maintained and conflicts of interest avoided. The accused author(s) must have opportunity to respond to the allegations.

4. Outcomes and corrective actions
Depending on the findings and severity of misconduct, BJES may take one or more of the following actions:

  • If the manuscript is still under review: reject it and / or require corrections.

  • If the work has been published:

    • Issue a Correction (erratum) if the integrity of the work is otherwise sound but some part needs amendment.

    • Issue an Expression of Concern if the investigation is ongoing but delay would mislead readers.

    • Retract the article if findings are unreliable, misconduct is confirmed, or ethical/ legal breaches are significant.

    • Remove or amend the article from the journal’s website and indexers if required.

  • Notify the author’s institution, funding agency or other relevant body if appropriate.

  • Prohibit the authors (or co-authors) of the confirmed misconduct from submitting to BJES for a defined period or permanently, depending on severity.

  • Provide a public notice of the action taken, linked to the original article (in accordance with best practice like that of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines).

5. Transparency and record-keeping

  • All steps of complaint handling shall be documented, including dates, persons involved, correspondence and decisions.

  • Outcomes (retractions, corrections, bans) shall be made transparent to readers.

  • The journal will review and update its misconduct policy periodically in light of evolving standards and guidance.

6. Preventive measures and duties

 

  • Authors: must ensure that their work is original, properly cite sources, maintain and provide underlying data if requested, declare conflicts of interest, and submit only to BJES if it is not under review elsewhere.

  • Reviewers & Editors: must handle manuscripts and allegations with confidentiality, disclose possible conflicts of interest, and act promptly if they suspect misconduct.

  • The journal & publisher: must undertake reasonable steps to detect misconduct (e.g., use plagiarism-detection software at submission screening), maintain an impartial review process and promote ethical publication practices.