Dealing with Misconduct

The Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Finance (JOCAF) is committed to handling all cases of publication misconduct in a fair, transparent, and consistent manner. The journal follows internationally accepted ethical standards, including the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), in addressing allegations of misconduct at any stage of the publication process.

Definition of Misconduct

Publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

  • Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism)
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Duplicate or redundant publication
  • Improper authorship (e.g., ghost authorship or gift authorship)
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest
  • Manipulation of the peer review process
  • Ethical violations in research involving human or animal subjects
  • Misrepresentation of research findings

Identification of Misconduct

Allegations of misconduct may arise from:

  • Editors or reviewers during the review process
  • Plagiarism detection software screening
  • Readers, researchers, or whistleblowers after publication
  • Institutional or regulatory investigations

All allegations are taken seriously and investigated thoroughly, regardless of when they are discovered.

Investigation Procedure

When misconduct is suspected, JOCAF follows a structured investigation process:

Step 1: Preliminary Assessment

The editorial office evaluates the complaint or suspicion to determine its validity and relevance.

Step 2: Author Notification

Authors are formally notified and given an opportunity to respond to the allegations.

Step 3: Evidence Review

The editorial board reviews all available evidence, including manuscripts, data, reviewer reports, and plagiarism reports.

Step 4: Editorial Decision

Based on the findings, the Editor-in-Chief makes a final decision in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Possible Actions

Depending on the severity of the misconduct, JOCAF may take one or more of the following actions:

  • Request correction or revision of the manuscript
  • Issue a formal warning to the authors
  • Reject the manuscript during review
  • Retract a published article
  • Notify the authors’ institution or funding body
  • Ban authors from future submissions for a defined period

Retraction Policy

Articles may be retracted if:

  • The findings are proven unreliable due to misconduct or error
  • Plagiarism or unethical practices are confirmed
  • The article contains fraudulent or manipulated data
  • Ethical approval requirements were not met

Retracted articles will remain publicly accessible but clearly marked as “Retracted” to preserve the scholarly record and ensure transparency.

Corrections and Expressions of Concern

Where issues are minor or inconclusive:

  • Corrections (errata or corrigenda) may be issued
  • An expression of concern may be published while investigations are ongoing

This ensures readers are properly informed while maintaining academic integrity.

Appeals Process

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions related to misconduct findings. Appeals must:

  • Be submitted in writing to the editorial office
  • Clearly state the grounds for appeal
  • Provide supporting evidence or clarification

Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, where necessary, an independent editorial advisor.

Confidentiality

All investigations into misconduct are treated with strict confidentiality. Information is only shared with relevant parties involved in the investigation process.