Research Misconduct & Conflict of Interest

Jurnal Penelitian Geografi | Editorial Policy

Research Misconduct & Conflict of Interest

Allegations, disclosure, independent assessment, complaints and appeals.

Publication Policies / Research Integrity

01 Scope of Research Misconduct

JPG takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously at submission, review and after publication. Concerns may involve authors, reviewers, editors, or third parties and may be raised by readers, institutions, whistleblowers, or editorial staff.

Fabrication or falsification: invented observations, manipulated survey results, fabricated geographical coordinates, or altered analysis outputs.
Plagiarism and redundant publication: unattributed appropriation, substantial overlapping publication, or simultaneous submission without disclosure.
Image, map and data manipulation: misleading alteration of satellite images, GIS layers, cartographic outputs, figures or tables without transparent explanation.
Compromised peer review or authorship: fake reviewer identities, reviewer interference, guest/ghost authorship, or undisclosed conflicts.
Research ethics and permissions: failure to obtain necessary participant consent, institutional approvals or permissions relating to fieldwork and restricted data, where applicable.
Undisclosed AI use: violations of the journal’s AI & Plagiarism Policy.

Similarity or AI-detection tools may assist editorial screening, but their outputs are not, by themselves, conclusive proof of misconduct.

02 How to Report a Concern

Reports should be submitted to the editorial office using the Contact Editorial Office page. Provide the relevant manuscript title or article DOI, a clear description of the concern, and available documentary evidence (e.g., a data comparison, image, or specific passage). If a concern involves an editor, it should be directed to the Editor-in-Chief or publisher for independent handling.

Confidential handlingJPG seeks to restrict sensitive allegations and personal information to those responsible for evaluating the case. Anonymous reports may be considered when supported by verifiable evidence; malicious or unsupported claims will not be treated as established facts.

03 Editorial Assessment and Investigation

Stage	Editorial handling
1. Preliminary review	Assess the specificity, relevance and credibility of the concern; preserve the relevant record and evidence.
2. Conflict-of-interest check	Assign responsibility to an editor without an apparent conflict of interest.
3. Author or party response	Seek a fair explanation and supporting source data or documents before reaching a determination.
4. Independent verification	Consult another editor, subject expert or institution when technical or institutional assessment is needed.
5. Decision and record	Document the rationale; apply a proportionate response and inform affected parties as appropriate.

Potential outcomes include no further action, a request for clarification or revision, rejection of an unpublished submission, or a correction, expression of concern or retraction of a published article. Serious issues may require contact with the authors’ institution.

04 Conflicts of Interest / Competing Interests

A competing interest is any financial, professional, personal, institutional or other relationship that could reasonably be perceived to influence the research or editorial judgment, whether or not actual bias has occurred.

Party	Disclosure and management expectations
Authors	Disclose relevant funding sources, employment, consultancy, financial interests, close collaboration and other relationships that may influence the study.
Reviewers	Declare relevant conflicts before accepting an invitation; decline review where independence cannot be maintained.
Editors	Declare relevant interests, recuse themselves from affected submissions and arrange independent handling.
Publisher	Protect editorial decisions from commercial, institutional or personal interference.

A declaration of no competing interests should be included when appropriate. Disclosure does not automatically disqualify a paper but permits transparent editorial management.

05 Complaints, Appeals and Fair Treatment

Authors may appeal a decision by explaining the scientific or procedural grounds of disagreement and providing supporting evidence. An appeal is not a guarantee of reversal. Complaints and appeals should be assessed by an editor who was not directly responsible for the disputed decision whenever practical. JPG does not make editorial judgments solely on the basis of anonymous accusations, automated similarity scores or unverified third-party statements.

All parties are expected to communicate professionally. The editorial office records decisions and provides an explanation consistent with confidentiality obligations.