Jurnal Ilmu Komputer dan Informatika (JIKI) is committed to upholding integrity, transparency, and accountability in all research and publication activities. JIKI takes every allegation of research or publication misconduct seriously and handles it objectively, fairly, and confidentially, following the guidelines and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

This policy applies to manuscripts under consideration and to articles already published in JIKI. It covers the conduct of authors, reviewers, and editors.

1. Forms of Research and Publication Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• Data fabrication. Making up data, experimental results, or other research outputs that were not actually obtained. Examples include reporting experiments that were never run or presenting synthetic data as real data without disclosure.
• Data and result falsification. Manipulating research materials, data, code, processes, or results so that the research record is inaccurate. In computational research, this includes:
  • Selectively reporting favourable runs, random seeds, or data splits.
  • Tuning models on the test set or allowing data leakage between training and test data while presenting the results as unbiased.
  • Misrepresenting baseline results or using inconsistent evaluation protocols to inflate performance.
  • Altering figures, plots, screenshots, or images in ways that misrepresent the original data.
• Plagiarism. Using another person’s ideas, text, data, source code, algorithms, figures, or other work without proper attribution. This includes verbatim copying, disguised paraphrasing (including text altered by paraphrasing or translation tools), and presenting another person’s software or model as one’s own.
• Duplicate and redundant publication. Publishing the same or substantially similar work in more than one venue without disclosure and justification. Examples include simultaneous submission to multiple journals and inappropriate text recycling. Extended versions of conference papers are acceptable only when the earlier version is cited and the extension is substantial.
• Authorship misconduct. Gift, guest, or ghost authorship; listing authors without their consent; buying, selling, or trading authorship; or changing the author list without the consent of all authors.
• Peer review manipulation. Suggesting fake reviewers or supplying false reviewer contact details, reviewing one’s own manuscript, colluding with reviewers, or otherwise improperly influencing the review process.
• Citation manipulation. Excessive or unjustified self-citation, coercive citation requested by reviewers or editors, or coordinated citation exchange between authors or journals (citation cartels).
• Paper mills and fraudulent manuscripts. Submitting manuscripts produced by commercial or systematic fabrication services, or manuscripts showing clear signs of fabricated content, such as nonsensical text, “tortured phrases”, or fabricated references.
• Undisclosed or inappropriate use of generative AI. Using generative AI tools to produce substantive content, data, results, references, or images without disclosure, or in breach of JIKI’s Policy on the Use of Generative AI.
• Breaches of research ethics and data protection. Failing to obtain ethical approval or informed consent where required. Collecting, scraping, or processing personal or sensitive data unlawfully or in breach of platform terms of service. Violating applicable data protection regulations, including Indonesia’s Personal Data Protection Law (Law No. 27 of 2022).
• Misuse of third-party materials. Using datasets, software, pre-trained models, or other materials without required permission, or in breach of their licences.
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest that could affect the objectivity of the research, its review, or editorial decisions.
• Reviewer and editor misconduct. Breaching the confidentiality of manuscripts under review (including uploading them to generative AI tools), misappropriating unpublished ideas, data, or code, or failing to disclose conflicts of interest.

Honest error, differences in scientific interpretation or judgement, and methodological limitations do not in themselves constitute misconduct. Each case is assessed according to the nature of the issue, the available evidence, and its context.

2. Reporting an Allegation

Anyone with relevant information or evidence of possible misconduct relating to a manuscript submitted to, or an article published in, JIKI may report it to the editorial team at [journal email address].

A report should include:

1. Information that identifies the manuscript or article concerned (e.g., title, authors, DOI, or manuscript ID).
2. A clear and specific description of the alleged misconduct.
3. Available supporting evidence, such as documents, data, source code, comparison publications, similarity reports, or links to related sources.
4. The reporter’s name and contact details, so the editors can request further information if needed.

JIKI encourages reports made in good faith and based on verifiable information. The reporter’s identity will be kept confidential. Anonymous reports may be considered if they contain sufficient and verifiable evidence.

3. Procedure for Handling Allegations

JIKI handles allegations through the following steps:

1. Receipt and initial assessment. The Editor-in-Chief acknowledges receipt of the report and assesses its relevance, clarity, and whether there is sufficient initial evidence to proceed.
2. Collection of information and evidence. The editor may examine the manuscript, data, source code, similarity check results, and other relevant documents, and may request clarification from the reporter, the authors, or other relevant parties.
3. Response from the authors. The authors concerned are informed of the allegation and given a reasonable opportunity to explain or respond, including providing raw data, code, or experimental records where relevant.
4. Assessment and consultation. Where needed, JIKI may consult members of the editorial board, independent experts in the relevant field, the authors’ institution(s), or other appropriate authorities.
5. Decision. Based on the findings and evidence, the editor decides on an action proportionate to the seriousness of the misconduct and the stage of publication.
6. Documentation and follow-up. All steps and decisions are documented to ensure consistency, accountability, and appropriate follow-up. The relevant parties are informed of the outcome.

An allegation does not in itself prove that misconduct has occurred. All parties are treated with fairness and respect throughout the process.

4. Possible Actions

Depending on the findings, the seriousness of the misconduct, and the publication status, JIKI may take one or more of the following actions:

• Request clarification or additional supporting documents, data, or source code.
• Ask the authors to correct problematic data, statements, attributions, or sections of the manuscript, where correction is sufficient.
• Suspend the editorial process while the investigation is ongoing.
• Reject the manuscript if misconduct is confirmed or the integrity of the work cannot be verified.
• Publish a Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum) to fix errors in a published article.
• Publish an Expression of Concern when serious issues remain unresolved or an investigation is still in progress.
• Retract a published article when serious misconduct is confirmed or the reliability of its findings is substantially compromised. Retracted articles remain accessible but are clearly marked as retracted, with a retraction notice explaining the reason.
• Inform the authors’ institution(s), funders, or other relevant authorities for further investigation.
• In cases of serious or repeated misconduct, refuse further submissions from the authors concerned for a period set by the editorial board.

Decisions are based on the evidence, the seriousness of the misconduct, its impact on the scientific record, and the journal’s policies.

5. Confidentiality and Protection of Parties

JIKI protects the confidentiality of reporters, authors, reviewers, and other parties involved throughout the process, to the extent consistent with the needs of the investigation and applicable regulations.

Information about an allegation is shared only with those who need it for the investigation, decision-making, or relevant legal or institutional obligations. JIKI will not tolerate retaliation against anyone who raises concerns in good faith. Knowingly false or malicious allegations may themselves be treated as misconduct.

6. Responsibilities of Authors and Institutions

Authors are responsible for conducting research ethically, reporting data and results honestly, citing sources correctly, and meeting all relevant ethical requirements. Authors should keep their raw data, source code, and experimental records for a reasonable period after publication and make them available to the editors on request.

When an allegation requires a formal investigation beyond the journal’s authority, JIKI may refer the matter to the institution where the research was carried out or to other appropriate authorities. JIKI does not replace the formal investigative role of institutions. However, it remains responsible for the editorial decisions needed to protect the integrity of the scientific record.

7. Commitment to Publication Integrity

JIKI is committed to handling every allegation of misconduct fairly, consistently, as transparently as possible, and on the basis of evidence. The aim is to preserve the reliability of the scientific record, protect the integrity of research, and maintain the trust of the academic community in the work JIKI publishes.

All parties involved are expected to cooperate professionally with the investigation and to respect the principles of academic integrity and publication ethics.