Allegation of Research Misconduct

Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Technology Information (JAITI) is committed to maintaining the integrity, transparency, and reliability of scholarly research and publication. The journal takes allegations of research misconduct seriously and handles all concerns fairly, objectively, confidentially, and in accordance with established publication ethics principles. All allegations will be assessed carefully, and no individual will be considered responsible for misconduct before the available evidence has been evaluated.

Definition of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct refers to violations of responsible research and publication practices that compromise the integrity, originality, accuracy, or reliability of scholarly work. Such misconduct may occur during research design, data collection, analysis, manuscript preparation, peer review, or publication. JAITI evaluates allegations based on the nature of the concern, the available evidence, applicable ethical standards, and relevant institutional or professional guidance.

Data Fabrication
Inventing research data, observations, experiments, participants, results, or other research information and reporting them as genuine findings.
Data Falsification
Manipulating research materials, processes, data, images, or results in ways that misrepresent the research record or produce misleading findings.
Plagiarism
Using another person's ideas, words, data, methods, figures, or research outputs without appropriate acknowledgment, attribution, or permission where required.
Publication Misconduct
Practices such as duplicate publication, undisclosed overlapping submissions, manipulated peer review, fabricated authorship, or other actions that undermine publication integrity.
Ethical Violations
Failure to comply with applicable research ethics requirements, including improper handling of human participants, missing required approvals, or misuse of confidential research information.
Other Integrity Concerns
Undisclosed conflicts of interest, misleading reporting, inappropriate image manipulation, misrepresentation of contributions, or other practices that may compromise research integrity.
Submission of Allegations

Authors, reviewers, readers, research institutions, and other concerned parties may report suspected research or publication misconduct to the journal's editorial office. Reports should be submitted in good faith and should provide sufficient information to allow a preliminary assessment. Whenever possible, the report should include:

  • The title, DOI, URL, or other identifying information of the relevant manuscript or published article.
  • A clear description of the suspected misconduct and the specific concerns involved.
  • Supporting evidence, such as relevant publications, data, documents, screenshots, or other verifiable materials.
  • Relevant dates, circumstances, and contextual information that may assist the assessment.
  • Contact information for follow-up, where the complainant is willing to provide it.

JAITI may consider anonymous reports when sufficient verifiable information is provided. Allegations must not be treated as established facts solely because a complaint has been submitted.

Procedure for Handling Allegations of Research Misconduct
1. Receipt and Acknowledgment
The editorial office receives and records the allegation and, where contact information is available, acknowledges receipt. Information about the case will be handled with appropriate confidentiality, subject to applicable legal, ethical, and procedural requirements.
2. Preliminary Assessment
The editor or designated editorial representative assesses whether the allegation falls within the journal's remit and whether sufficient information exists to proceed. The assessment may involve checking the manuscript, publication record, similarity reports, research materials, or other relevant evidence. Where appropriate, additional information may be requested from the complainant.
3. Communication with the Relevant Parties
Where appropriate, the journal provides the author or other relevant party with an opportunity to respond to the concerns and submit supporting explanations or evidence. Communications should be objective, fair, and sufficiently detailed to allow a meaningful response without unnecessarily disclosing confidential information.
4. Referral for Formal Investigation
When the allegation requires a formal investigation beyond the journal's editorial capacity, JAITI may refer the matter to the author's institution, research integrity office, funding organization, or another competent body. The journal may provide relevant evidence and cooperate with the investigation, subject to confidentiality and applicable requirements. The journal does not replace the institution's role in conducting a formal research misconduct investigation.
5. Evaluation of Findings
The editorial team evaluates the available evidence, the responses received, and any findings provided by the relevant institution or competent body. Editorial decisions are made objectively and proportionately, taking into account the reliability of the research record and the seriousness of the identified concerns. A lack of sufficient evidence does not automatically establish that misconduct occurred.
6. Editorial Action
Depending on the findings and the effect on the scholarly record, the journal may take appropriate action, including rejection of a manuscript, correction of a published article, publication of an expression of concern, or retraction. Where necessary, the journal may temporarily suspend editorial processing while the matter is being clarified. Any action will be proportionate to the evidence and consistent with applicable publication ethics guidance.
7. Communication and Follow-up
Where appropriate, the journal communicates its editorial decision to the relevant parties and maintains a record of the case. If new evidence emerges, the journal may reconsider its decision or take additional action to safeguard the integrity of the scholarly record.
Confidentiality and Protection
JAITI handles allegations and related communications confidentially to the extent reasonably possible. The identities of complainants, authors, reviewers, and other involved parties will not be disclosed unnecessarily. Information may be shared with institutions or relevant authorities when necessary to assess or investigate the allegation, subject to applicable rules and obligations. Retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith is not acceptable.
Fairness and Due Process
All parties will be treated fairly and impartially. Authors and other individuals concerned will be given an appropriate opportunity to respond when necessary. Editorial decisions will be based on relevant evidence and applicable ethical standards rather than personal relationships, institutional status, academic seniority, or unsupported allegations.
Responsibilities of Authors and Institutions

Authors are expected to cooperate with reasonable editorial inquiries and provide accurate information relevant to allegations concerning their work. Research institutions and other competent bodies are encouraged to conduct formal investigations when appropriate and to communicate relevant findings to the journal, subject to applicable confidentiality and legal requirements.

  • Authors should provide genuine research data and materials when reasonably requested and available.
  • Authors should respond honestly and promptly to questions about the integrity of their manuscripts or publications.
  • Institutions should investigate credible allegations within their authority and share relevant findings when permitted.
  • Editors should cooperate with legitimate institutional investigations and consider appropriate action to correct the scholarly record.
Possible Editorial Outcomes
1. No Further Action
When the available evidence does not support the allegation or no editorial action is warranted, the journal may close the case while documenting the assessment as appropriate.
2. Manuscript Rejection
A manuscript may be rejected when credible evidence demonstrates a serious breach of publication ethics or when the work fails to meet the journal's ethical or scientific requirements.
3. Correction
A correction may be published when a specific error can be rectified and the overall reliability of the article remains intact.
4. Expression of Concern
An expression of concern may be issued when serious unresolved questions exist about the reliability or integrity of a publication and further investigation is needed.
5. Retraction
A published article may be retracted when there is sufficient evidence that its findings are unreliable, the work involves serious plagiarism or fabrication, or other grounds for retraction are established in accordance with relevant publication ethics guidance.
Good-Faith Reporting and Research Integrity

JAITI encourages the responsible reporting of suspected research misconduct to protect the scholarly record and promote ethical research practices. Deliberately submitting false allegations, fabricating evidence, intimidating complainants, or obstructing a legitimate investigation may itself raise serious ethical concerns. The journal distinguishes honest errors and reasonable scholarly disagreements from misconduct and bases its actions on the evidence available.

Applicable Ethical Guidance

JAITI seeks to handle allegations of research and publication misconduct consistently with recognized publication ethics principles and relevant institutional requirements. Where applicable, the journal may refer to guidance issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) concerning the handling of misconduct allegations, cooperation between journals and research institutions, corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions.