Allegations of Misconduct

---

AnaPub Publications manages allegations of research misconduct based on the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These guidelines can be accessed at COPE Core Practices.

Author Responsibilities

Authors are required to thoroughly read the journal’s author instructions and ethical policies and to adhere to these terms before submission. While authors may suggest potential reviewers for the peer-review process, the qualifications and potential conflicts of interest of all reviewers will be carefully evaluated before they are invited to review.

Reporting and Managing Complaints

Reports of research misconduct can relate to a published article or a manuscript under peer review. The procedure for managing complaints of author misconduct is designed to be sensitive, tactful, and confidential. The process is as follows:

Receiving the Complaint:

• The journal’s editorial office receives a complaint alleging that an article submitted to or published in the journal contains research misconduct.

Detailing the Complaint:

• The complainant must clearly specify the nature and details of the misconduct. For instance, in a case of plagiarism, the plagiarized sections should be highlighted, and references to the original and suspected articles should be provided.

Investigation:

• The editorial office conducts an investigation. During this period, the editor and the corresponding author(s) of the suspected article will be communicated.

Author Response:

• The corresponding author(s) will be asked to provide an explanation with factual statements and any available evidence.

Acceptance of Misconduct:

• If the author(s) accept the misconduct complaint, the editorial office will take appropriate actions:
  • Published Article: An erratum or retraction may be issued to address the situation. Disagreements over the wording of the correction may arise.
  • Manuscript Under Review: The review process may continue, with the author(s) making the necessary corrections.

Nonresponse or Unsatisfactory Explanation:

• If there is no response within the stipulated time or the explanation is unsatisfactory, the article may be permanently retracted or rejected. Before making a final decision, confirmation will be sought from experts at the relevant institution, or other authorities as needed.

Outcome Notification:

• The complainant will be informed of the outcome once the issue is resolved.

Conclusion:

• Once the issue is resolved, the complaint case will be considered concluded.

This structured approach ensures that allegations of misconduct are handled fairly, transparently, and with due respect to all parties involved.