Research Misconduct

Journal of Educators and Education (JoEaE) is committed to protecting the integrity, accuracy, transparency, reliability, and permanence of the scholarly record. This policy establishes the journal’s procedures for handling allegations of research or publication misconduct, and for post-publication Comments and Criticism. Post-publication notices (corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions) and their display in Crossmark are covered separately in the Retraction and Correction Policy and the Crossmark and Post-Publication Update Policy.

This policy should be read together with the Publication Ethics page, which sets out the general ethical principles for Authors, Editors, Reviewers, the Editorial Board, editorial staff, and the Publisher. The journal refers, where applicable, to guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, and Crossref/Crossmark guidance.

1. General Principles

Allegations of misconduct and post-publication concerns will be assessed fairly, objectively, proportionately, and as confidentially as reasonably possible. Allegations will not be treated as established misconduct before appropriate assessment or investigation.

Authors and other relevant parties will normally be given a reasonable opportunity to provide clarification, documentation, or a response. Persons with a relevant Conflict of Interest must not determine the outcome of the case. Financial or commercial considerations, including payment status, must not determine whether action is required to protect the scholarly record.

2. Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research or publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, data or image manipulation, unethical authorship practices, undisclosed Conflicts of Interest, duplicate or redundant publication, and misrepresentation of ethical approval or consent.

Concerns may be reported by Authors, readers, Reviewers, Editors, institutions, research participants, whistleblowers, funders, or other parties to ...@unesa.ac.id, with the manuscript or article concerned and supporting evidence where possible. Anonymous or confidential allegations may be considered when they are specific, credible, and relevant enough to permit meaningful assessment.

When a credible concern is received, the journal may conduct an initial assessment, request clarification or documentation, consult independent Reviewers, subject experts, research-integrity or ethics experts, or legal advisers, and contact the Authors’ institution, research ethics committee, funder, or other competent authority. The journal may suspend peer review, acceptance, production, or publication while a serious concern is being assessed.

Depending on the findings and the publication status, actions may include clarification, revision, rejection, withdrawal, a post-publication notice, or referral to an appropriate institution. Post-publication notices follow the Retraction and Correction Policy, and text overlap is handled under Plagiarism Screening.

3. Withdrawal Requests

A request to withdraw a manuscript that has not yet been published may be submitted in writing by any Author and must include a clear reason. The journal may ask all Authors to confirm the request before processing it, particularly where the manuscript is in peer review, revision, acceptance, or production, or where the request may affect other Authors. The scope of withdrawal, and how concerns about published articles are handled instead, are described in the Crossmark and Post-Publication Update Policy.

An administrative fee of IDR 100,000 is charged for Author-requested withdrawal to cover the cost of handling the article. This fee does not influence any editorial decision. It is not charged where the withdrawal results from an error made by the journal or the Publisher, or where the action is required for ethical, legal, or research-integrity reasons. Payment status must never prevent the journal from taking action necessary to protect the scholarly record. Other publication charges are described in the Publication Fees section of the journal website.

4. Post-Publication Comments and Criticism

Journal of Educators and Education (JoEaE) supports responsible post-publication scholarly discussion through Comments and Criticism. These may address methodology, statistical analysis, theoretical interpretation, scientific reasoning, limitations, reproducibility, replication, interpretation of findings, or other substantive academic matters concerning a published article.

Substantive Comments and Criticism undergo editorial screening and may undergo independent peer review. Allegations of fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research, authorship misconduct, peer-review manipulation, or other serious violations should normally be reported confidentially to the Editorial Office rather than presented as established facts in a public comment. Where a submission contains a possible misconduct allegation, the Editor may decide that it proceeds as scholarly discussion, a research-integrity case, or both through separate processes.

5. Author Response

Authors of the original article may be invited to submit an Author Response to substantive Comments and Criticism. It should remain professional, evidence-based, and focused on the scholarly issues raised. It undergoes editorial assessment, and independent peer review where it introduces new data, new analyses, substantial technical arguments, or new scholarly claims.

Published Comments and Criticism and Author Responses will normally receive their own DOI and be linked to the original article.

6. Policy Review

Journal of Educators and Education (JoEaE) periodically reviews this policy to keep it consistent with publication ethics standards, scholarly publishing best practices, Crossref/Crossmark requirements, applicable laws, and the needs of the journal, and may revise it in response to guidance from COPE, Crossref, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), or other relevant organizations.

Where a case is not addressed by this policy, the Editor may exercise professional editorial judgment, considering external guidance, available evidence, independent expert opinion where necessary, and the principles of fairness, transparency, proportionality, confidentiality, editorial independence, and protection of the scholarly record. The Publisher may provide administrative, technical, legal, or operational support within its non-editorial role. Until a revised policy is formally adopted, the current approved version remains applicable.

7. Related Policies

  • Publication Ethics
  • Retraction and Correction Policy
  • Crossmark and Post-Publication Update Policy
  • Plagiarism Screening
  • Authorship
  • Conflict of Interest
  • Research Ethic
  • Data Availability
  • Gen-AI Utilization
  • Publication Fees

References and Standards

  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Publication Ethics Guidance and Resources.
  • COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME. Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). Transparency and Best Practice.
  • Crossref. Crossmark Documentation.