Plagiarism Policy of IJR

Submitting authors are required to acknowledge that they are aware of the International Journal of Research (IJR)’s policy on plagiarism and copyright when signing the article’s copyright transfer agreement. Manuscripts are sent out for review on the condition that any unpublished data cited within are properly credited and the appropriate permission has been sought. The policy outlined on this page applies to International Journal of Research (IJR).
Plagiarism is the copying of ideas, text, data and other creative work (e.g. tables, figures and graphs) and presenting it as original research without proper citation. Separate from the issue of plagiarism is the need for authors to obtain permission to reuse previously published work (even if properly cited) from the holder of the copyright (which is typically not the author).
It is essential that editors and reviewers be told by the authors when any portion of a paper is based heavily on previous work, even if this work has been written by one or more of the authors of the paper. It is the responsibility of the author not only to cite the previous work, including their own, but to provide an indication of the extent to which a paper depends on this work.
While following these broad principles, authors should recognize the following guidelines:
1) Plagiarism covers the use of ideas that have been presented in prior work, regardless of whether the ideas are expressed using the same words, tables or graphics.
2) Word-for-word copying of the work by others must be clearly identified. Short segments (a few words to one or two sentences) must be put in quotes or italicized; longer segments (e.g. a paragraph) should be indented or italicized. In both cases, the quoted work has to be followed by a citation, which may be a URL. This does not apply to casual phrases that do not convey original content (e.g. “This paper makes the following contributions”). Extensive copying of the work of others, even if clearly indicated, is generally not allowed.
3) More extensive word-for-word copying of one’s own work is permitted (with permission from the holder of any copyright), but this must be clearly indicated in the article. This does not apply to previous documents such as working papers and theses which were written as part of the research. If an entire section is copied from another source (co-authored by at least one author of the submitted paper), it should contain words to the effect “This section is taken from section x.x of Mr A and Mr B (2013)” (where Mr A and Mr B are co-authors of the submitted paper). Alternatively, a paper might include an opening footnote with a statement such as: An earlier version of this paper was presented at the […] conference on (date). [Reference to the original paper in the list of references]. The sections on […] and […] originally appeared in the conference paper. This paper adds results [ideas, analysis, improvements,] in sections […].
4) Proper attribution of an idea is required even if a journal operates with double-blind review. Authors should always cite related work even if that work is their own, even if the journal has double blind review. If an author is concerned that such citation would reveal their identity, thereby circumventing the double blind process, they should nevertheless include a “blinded” citation in the manuscript, i.e., a citation that does not include their name, and explain to the journal’s editor how, if the paper is accepted for publication, that citation will be changed for the final version.
5) The first paper in which a creative contribution occurs (text, ideas, analysis) gets the credit for the contribution, even if it has not yet been accepted for publication. Subsequent papers (by the same or different authors), are expected to cite the first paper (even if it is under review).
If the first paper is under review:
• It should still be cited in any subsequent use.
• If the material in the first paper is used as the basis for new research, it should be cited, but there is no need to inform the journal handling the original submission.
If the first paper is rejected:
• Authors of the first paper can transfer credit for the contribution to a later paper (even if the first paper is resubmitted elsewhere). The resubmitted first paper should then be modified to reference the later paper that now is credited with the contribution.
If the original contribution from the first paper is essentially presented again as the main contribution (as opposed to being used as the basis for new research), as might happen in a book chapter or conference proceedings paper, then special care must be taken:

• If the original paper is still under review, the author must notify the editor of the journal reviewing the original submission and follow the policies of that journal. Failure to do so may be construed as parallel publication of a result.
6) The use and reuse of empirical data follows the same principles as other types of research, although some issues are unique to the nature of data as opposed to ideas expressed in text and mathematics. Some general guidelines regarding plagiarism in the reporting of empirical research are:
a) Reuse of empirical data to support new analysis must clearly identify the original source of the data and the degree to which the data is being reused or analysed in a new and innovative way.
b) Plagiarism in empirical research includes:
i) Copying or using any data without citation (and permission),
ii) Duplicating analysis (on the same data as an earlier paper) without citation which is essentially the same as the earlier paper,
iii) Copying, or direct reproduction, of charts and graphs that represent data from a previous publication in effectively the same way as an earlier paper, without citation.
7) Mathematics: While plagiarism of mathematical ideas is not allowed (credit must be given just as for other contributions), the re-use of notation for consistency is encouraged, including the re-use of variable definitions. If a mathematical idea is copied without attribution, but expressed with different notation, this is still plagiarism. This does not apply to mathematical models and algorithms that have become common knowledge within the research community. A paper should always indicate whether a mathematical model, algorithm or other result is from the literature, or is an original contribution of the paper. When in doubt, it is always best practice to cite prior contributions.
The overarching goal of this policy is transparency, so that the editorial staff understands what is new and original, and the degree to which the paper is drawing on the work of others or the authors. If you are not sure how to properly credit work that is presented elsewhere (such as a parallel publication which is also under review or a conference proceeding), the best strategy is to describe the situation in a cover letter to the editor.

Procedures and penalties
The Editors-in-Chief is the primary means of detecting plagiarism in manuscripts submitted to IJR. Complainants shall bring cases of suspected author misconduct to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief (EIC). The EIC shall ensure that the following documentation is provided: written description of the alleged misconduct; title of the manuscript; full list of author names; for alleged plagiarized manuscript – title, list of author names and publication in which the manuscript appeared; for use of ideas – title of idea, full list of creators and date of creation; copies of both manuscripts; full name and address of complainant. An Editor-in-Chief (EIC), after being made aware of a suspicion of plagiarism, shall review all evidence and make a preliminary judgment regarding the claim. As part of the EIC’s deliberation, it is required that the authors be contacted and provided an opportunity to rebut the charge. If the EIC finds sufficient evidence for justification of a charge of plagiarism, the EIC shall forward all materials to the Vice President of Publications for further review.
Upon receipt of materials in support of a charge of plagiarism, the Vice President of Publications shall appoint an ad hoc committee to make a determination of the charge. The committee shall include, at a minimum, the Vice President of Publications and at least three other persons. At the discretion of the Vice President of Publications, other members of the Publications Committee may be appointed to the ad hoc committee, including the EIC who has presented the charge of plagiarism.
The ad hoc committee shall first contact the author(s) in writing and ask for a response to the charge. Based on the response, the ad hoc committee may obtain additional information, which may include a review of the manuscript in question by experts to help determine the level of plagiarism. The ad hoc committee shall determine whether the charge is to be upheld and, if so, the sanction which is to be enforced against the authors. Sanctions would typically include a ban from submission to IJR for a period of time. Additionally, it is required that any author found guilty of plagiarism who also holds an editorial office at IJR will be dismissed from that office. The ad hoc committee has the sole responsibility and authority to determine the sanction. Sanctions may be applied unevenly in the case of multiple authors.
Once the finding and the sanction is determined, the Vice President of Publications will communicate the results in writing to the author(s) and make the finding known to current EIC. If the charge is not upheld, the process ends and no further actions are taken. In particular, the results are only communicated to those persons already involved in the process.
The decision of the committee may be appealed within 30 days of receiving written notification from the Vice President of Publications by written notification to the editor, IJR. In this case, the President will appoint an appeal committee, which includes the Vice President of Publications but may not include any other members of the ad hoc committee. The appeal committee will review the charges and make a final determination. The result will be communicated back to the author(s) within 60 days of receipt of the appeal notification.
Given the serious nature of a charge of plagiarism, it is required that confidentiality be maintained throughout the process. The charge of plagiarism, supporting materials and outcome are only to be made known to those persons who are involved in the review process.
If a determination of plagiarism has been made, and after any appeals are exhausted, the ad hoc committee will determine appropriate steps both to ensure that it does not happen again and, if the plagiarized paper has appeared in print, to possibly notify the readership. These steps may include notification of the employer(s) of the author(s), and if the paper has appeared in print, public notification to the readership.

Penalties for Plagiarism

When plagiarism has been found to have occurred, IJR will take the actions listed below as determined by the type of plagiarism. Unless determined otherwise during the investigation, all authors are deemed to be individually and collectively responsible for the content of a plagiarizing paper.
a. Verbatim copying, near-verbatim copying, or purposely paraphrasing a significant portion of another author’s paper without citing the source and without clearly delineating (e.g., in quotation marks) the source material.
• IJR will inform the Department Chair, Dean, or supervisor of the authors of the finding of plagiarism.
• The authors will be asked to write a formal letter of apology to the authors of the plagiarized paper, including an admission of plagiarism.
• If the paper has appeared in press, IJR will post a Notice of Plagiarism based on the investigation on the IJR Digital Library’s citation page of the plagiarizing paper and will remove access to the full text. The paper itself will be kept in the database for future research or legal purposes.
• If the paper is under submission, the paper can be automatically rejected by the Editor-in-Chief or the Program Chair without further revisions and without any further plagiarism investigation coordinated by the Editor-in-Chief.
b. Verbatim copying, near-verbatim copying, or purposely paraphrasing sentences of another author’s paper and/or, copying elements of another author’s paper (such as non-common knowledge illustrations and equations) without citing the source and without clearly delineating (e.g., in quotation marks) the source material.
• The authors will be asked to write a formal letter of apology to the authors of the plagiarized paper, including an admission of the plagiarism.
• If the paper has appeared in press, IJR will post a Notice of Plagiarism based on the investigation on the IJR Digital Library’s citation page of the plagiarizing paper and will remove access to the full text. The paper itself will be kept in the database in case of future legal actions.
• If the paper is under submission, the paper can be automatically rejected by the Editor-in-Chief without further revisions and without any further plagiarism investigation coordinated by the IJR. In addition, a letter of warning will be sent by the Editor-in-Chief to the authors with a copy of the IJR Policy and Procedures on Plagiarism.

c. Verbatim copying of portions of another author’s paper with citing, but not clearly differentiating what text has been copied (e.g., not applying quotation marks correctly) and/or not citing the source correctly.

NB: Representing substantial portions of another’s work as one’s own can result in the stronger penalties of 6a even when that work is cited.
• The authors will be asked to write a formal letter of apology to the authors of the plagiarized paper, including an admission of the plagiarism.
• If the paper is under submission, at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief or Program Chair, the paper can either be automatically rejected without future review or a revision will be required that clearly and correctly cites the previous work without any further plagiarism investigation coordinated by the IJR. In addition, a letter of warning will be sent by the Editor-in-Chief or the Program Chair to the authors with a copy of the IJR Policy and Procedures on Plagiarism.

d. Self-plagiarism or redundant, duplicative publication (verbatim or near-verbatim reuse of significant portions of one’s own copyrighted work in subsequent papers where the authors have not disclosed in the subsequent paper the previous publication).
• If the paper has appeared in press, IJR will post a Notice of Self Plagiarism or a Notice of Redundant Publication based on the investigation on the IJR Digital Library’s citation page of the self-plagiarizing paper.
• If the paper is under submission and at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief, the paper can either be automatically rejected without future review or a revision will be required that includes a citation to and discussion of the previous paper and without any further plagiarism investigation coordinated by the IJR. In addition, a letter of warning will be sent by the Editor-in-Chief.
Should the authors refuse to comply with the above (e.g., if they refuse to write a formal letter of apology) or if it is determined during the plagiarism investigation that there have been multiple violations of any of the above forms of plagiarism by the same authors, IJR retains the right to impose further sanctions such as automatic rejection of all current and future submissions for some extended period of time, invoking penalties prescribed by the IJR Codes of Ethics, and possibly statutory/injunctive relief. U.S. Copyright law allows a copyright owner to seek a maximum of $150,000 in damages upon a determination of wilful infringement of copyright.

Advertisements
Advertisements

ISSN 2348-6848 (Online) & 2348-795X (Print)

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: