IJRGP

Publication Ethics & Misconduct — IJRGP

IJRGP upholds the integrity of the scholarly record. We require authors, editors, reviewers and staff to meet the highest standards of honesty, transparency and professionalism. This Publication Ethics & Misconduct Policy explains what conduct we expect, how suspected breaches are handled, and what corrective actions we may take to protect readers, authors and the scientific record.

Principles and scope

This policy applies to all content published under the IJRGP imprint and to all persons acting in an editorial, review or author capacity. IJ RGP follows international best-practice guidance (including COPE principles) in investigations, corrections and retractions. The policy covers, but is not limited to, allegations of fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, image manipulation, unethical research conduct, reviewer/editor misconduct, and other practices that compromise scholarly trust.

Responsibilities

Authors

Authors must ensure submissions are original, properly cited, ethically conducted, and accurately reported; disclose funding and conflicts; provide data/code when required; and follow journal-specific and publisher-level policies.

Editors

Editors must make decisions impartially, disclose conflicts, recuse themselves where necessary, and ensure fair peer review.

Reviewers

Reviewers must provide objective, constructive, confidential reviews, declare conflicts of interest, and not use privileged information for personal advantage.

Publisher staff

Publisher staff ensure administrative integrity, maintain records, support investigations, and protect confidentiality.

Types of misconduct

Plagiarism

Unattributed copying of text, ideas, figures or data from another work.

Data fabrication/falsification

Inventing or manipulating data, results or images to misrepresent findings.

Duplicate / redundant publication

Presenting the same data or manuscript to multiple outlets without disclosure.

Image manipulation

Inappropriate alteration of images (e.g., gels, microscopy) that misrepresents results.

Authorship abuses

Gift authorship, ghost authorship, or omission of deserving contributors.

Undisclosed competing interests

Failing to declare financial, personal or institutional interests that could bias the work.

Reviewer / editor misconduct

Stealing ideas, inappropriate delay, biased handling, or failing to declare conflicts.

Preventive measures & expectations at submission

All submissions must include a

  • Declaration of Originality
  • Funding Statement
  • Conflict of Interest Statement
  • Data Availability Statement
  • Author Contribution Statement (CRediT).
  •  The corresponding author must confirm that the manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere and that all co-authors have approved submission.
  •  Authors are required to supply raw data, code, or images on request or deposit them in a trusted repository and provide persistent identifiers where possible.
  •  Submissions may be screened automatically for plagiarism and image issues before editorial review.

Preventive measures & expectations at submission

  •  All manuscripts undergo an initial technical and ethical screening. If preliminary checks identify possible misconduct (e.g., high similarity index, suspicious images), the editorial office will notify the Editor-in-Chief and may request explanations or raw data from the authors.
  •  If concerns are unresolved at this stage, the manuscript may be held while further checks are made or declined for review.

Submission → Screening → Editorial Triage → Action

Investigation process

  1. Receipt & acknowledgement: concerns raised via email (editorial@ijrgp.com or contact@ijrgp.com) or webform will be acknowledged in writing within 2 days. 
  2. Preliminary assessment: the editorial office and Editor-in-Chief assess the allegation’s plausibility and decide whether a formal investigation is warranted.
  3. Request for information: authors (and where relevant, reviewers/editors) will be asked to respond and supply original data, images, or other documentation. Institutions may be contacted for clarification.
  4. Formal investigation: if evidence suggests serious misconduct, IJ RGP will conduct a formal investigation following COPE flowcharts, often in cooperation with authors’ institutions and funders.
  5. Outcome & action: outcomes may include correction, expression of concern, retraction, removal of content, a statement of authorship changes, or sanctions (see below). A notice describing the outcome will be published and linked to the original article to maintain the transparency of the scholarly record

Possible editorial actions & corrective notices

  • Correction (erratum / corrigendum): for honest errors that do not invalidate findings. A linked correction notice will be published and the article metadata updated.
  • Expression of concern: used when an investigation is ongoing but readers should be alerted to potential problems.
  • Retraction: for proven or definitive evidence of unreliable findings (due to misconduct or honest error) that invalidates the article. Retractions are clearly labelled and the original article remains accessible with a retraction notice explaining why.
  • Removal: only in rare legal or ethical circumstances (e.g., legal defamation, court order, or privacy breach) where temporary or permanent removal is required; a notice explaining removal will be provided unless legally constrained.
  • Author corrections / corrigenda: minor author-requested corrections published as a linked notice.

Sanctions & consequences

Depending on severity and investigation outcome, sanctions may include:

  • Rejection of submissions; withdrawal of accepted articles; retraction of published articles.
  • Temporary or permanent bans on submitting to IJRGP.
  • Notification to authors’ institutions and funders.
  • Notification to indexing services and other publishers as required.
  • Public statement of findings and sanctions where appropriate.

Authorship disputes & contribution changes

  • Authorship changes after acceptance require a written statement from all authors explaining the change and agreement from all parties. IJ RGP does not make authorship changes without unanimous written consent.
  • Disputes over authorship may be referred to authors’ institutions for resolution; IJ RGP will act on institutional findings or recommendations.

Handling anonymous allegations & whistleblower protection

We accept anonymous reports but note that detailed allegations with evidence are easier to investigate. Complainants (anonymous or named) will not be penalised for raising concerns in good faith. IJ RGP protects confidentiality to the extent possible.

Reviewer & editor misconduct

Reviewers who breach confidentiality, plagiarise or misuse privileged information will be removed from reviewer pools and may be banned. Editors who fail to disclose conflicts or manipulate the editorial process will be recused and may be removed from editorial duties. Serious cases are reported to institutions.

Appeals & disagreements

Authors may appeal decisions or findings by submitting a formal appeal to editorial@ijrgp.com within 30 days of the decision. Appeals are reviewed by senior editors not involved in the original decision or by an independent panel if appropriate. Outcomes of appeals are final within the publisher’s authority; institutional investigations may supersede or add further action.

Report an Issue / Complaints & Appeals

If you have a formal complaint about editorial decisions, publishing ethics, or other serious concerns:

Editorial decisions or appeals

email editorial@ijrgp.com with subject Appeal — [Manuscript ID] within 30 days of decision.

Ethics or misconduct reports

email editorial@ijrgp.com (confidential). We will acknowledge within 24 hours and outline next steps.

Publisher complaints

escalate to contact@ijrgp.com with subject Complaint — [Topic].

Integrity is not optional; it is the oxygen of scholarship. IJRGP will act promptly, fairly and transparently when concerns arise, protecting readers and preserving the scholarly record. We expect all participants in the publication process to share this responsibility.

Scroll to Top