J-Dinamika: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to maintaining the integrity, reliability, and transparency of scholarly publishing. The journal takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously and seeks to handle all concerns fairly, confidentially, objectively, and in a timely manner.

This policy establishes the procedures for receiving, assessing, investigating, and responding to allegations of misconduct involving manuscripts submitted to or articles published in J-Dinamika. It applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and other parties whose conduct may affect the integrity of the journal's editorial and publication processes.

1. Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

Research or publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to, the following practices:

• Plagiarism: Using another person's words, ideas, data, images, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment or authorization.
• Data fabrication: Inventing data, participant numbers, survey responses, interview quotations, implementation records, or results that were not actually obtained.
• Data falsification: Manipulating, altering, omitting, or selectively reporting data or evidence in a manner that misrepresents the activities performed or their outcomes.
• Misrepresentation of community service activities: Claiming that training, counseling, technology implementation, community empowerment, or other activities occurred when they did not take place as reported.
• Manipulation of documentary evidence: Falsifying or misleadingly altering photographs, attendance records, evaluation results, certificates, or other documentation presented as evidence of community service activities.
• Duplicate or redundant publication: Submitting or publishing substantially overlapping content without appropriate disclosure or justification, contrary to the journal's publication policies.
• Authorship misconduct: Gift authorship, ghost authorship, unauthorized changes to the author list, or false statements concerning individual contributions.
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest: Concealing relevant financial, personal, professional, or institutional relationships that may affect the credibility of the work.
• Misuse of generative AI: Using AI tools to fabricate evidence, invent references, misrepresent activities, manipulate results, or conceal AI-generated content in violation of the journal's AI policy.
• Ethical violations: Conducting or reporting activities involving people, personal data, photographs, or vulnerable communities without applicable consent, authorization, or ethical safeguards.
• Peer-review or editorial misconduct: Breaching confidentiality, manipulating the review process, providing fraudulent reviewer identities, or improperly influencing editorial decisions.

Concerns may also involve other practices that materially compromise the accuracy, originality, ethical compliance, or reliability of a manuscript or published article.

2. Submission of Allegations

Allegations may be submitted by authors, reviewers, readers, community partners, institutions, or other individuals who have a reasonable basis for raising concerns about a manuscript or published article.

Reports should be submitted to the editorial office through the journal's official contact channels and should, where possible, include:

• The title of the manuscript or article and its DOI or publication URL, if available.
• A clear description of the suspected misconduct and the specific concerns raised.
• Supporting evidence, such as relevant documents, source publications, data inconsistencies, or comparisons of potentially duplicated material.
• Contact information for follow-up, where the reporting party is willing to provide it.

The journal will consider allegations based on the information available. Reports lacking complete documentation may still be assessed when the concern is sufficiently specific to warrant further examination. The journal will not automatically accept an allegation as proven merely because it has been reported.

3. Preliminary Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the editorial team will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the journal's responsibility and whether sufficient information exists to justify further inquiry.

The preliminary assessment may include checking the manuscript, published article, submission history, available supporting materials, similarity reports, image or data inconsistencies, author declarations, and relevant correspondence.

Where necessary, the editorial team may seek clarification from the reporting party or consult an independent editor or qualified expert. Similarity scores, AI-detection results, or other automated indicators will not be treated as conclusive evidence of misconduct without consideration of the surrounding circumstances and other available evidence.

If the allegation is clearly outside the journal's remit or is unsupported by sufficient information to proceed, the editorial team may close the matter and document the reason for doing so. Where credible concerns remain, the journal may initiate a more detailed inquiry.

4. Investigation and Author Response

When an allegation warrants further investigation, the editorial team will examine the available evidence and provide the relevant author or authors with an appropriate opportunity to respond to the concerns. The journal may request original data, field documentation, participant records, relevant permissions, statements of contribution, or other supporting evidence where applicable.

Authors are expected to respond accurately and cooperate with reasonable requests for clarification. Failure to respond does not automatically establish misconduct, but the journal may proceed with its assessment based on the available evidence.

Where the matter requires institutional authority, access to records beyond the journal's control, or specialized investigation, J-Dinamika may refer the concern to the relevant institution or responsible authority. The journal may also seek independent expert advice where appropriate.

Editors who have a personal, professional, or institutional conflict of interest in the matter must disclose the conflict and, where necessary, withdraw from the investigation. An independent editor or other appropriate person should handle the matter to preserve impartiality.

5. Confidentiality and Fair Treatment

J-Dinamika will handle allegations as confidentially as reasonably possible while allowing a fair assessment and appropriate investigation. Information will be shared only with individuals who need it to assess or resolve the matter, subject to applicable legal, institutional, and ethical obligations.

The journal will seek to protect the identities of reporting parties, authors, reviewers, and other individuals involved when disclosure is unnecessary. However, complete anonymity or confidentiality cannot be guaranteed in every case, particularly when an investigation requires disclosure to an institution or other authorized party.

All parties will be treated fairly and given an appropriate opportunity to provide relevant information. The journal does not presume that an allegation is true merely because it has been raised, and it does not tolerate retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith.

6. Editorial Actions and Outcomes

Following assessment of the available evidence and any relevant responses, the editorial team will determine an appropriate course of action based on the nature, seriousness, and implications of the concern.

Possible actions include:

• Closing the case when the allegation is not substantiated by the available evidence.
• Requesting clarification, additional documentation, or correction of inaccurate information.
• Requiring revisions or additional disclosure where the issue can be appropriately resolved before publication.
• Rejecting a manuscript when serious misconduct is established or the work does not meet the journal's integrity requirements.
• Issuing a correction or editorial notice for a published article when appropriate.
• Retracting a published article when the findings or integrity of the publication are seriously compromised and retraction is justified.
• Referring the matter to an author's institution or another appropriate authority when further investigation is necessary.

The journal will select actions proportionate to the findings and consistent with its publication ethics, correction, and retraction policies. Where appropriate, the editorial team may document the decision and its rationale in the journal's internal records.

7. Allegations Involving Published Articles

When an allegation concerns an article that has already been published, J-Dinamika will assess whether the issue affects the article's accuracy, ethical compliance, authorship, or reliability. The published record will be managed in a manner that supports transparency and preserves the integrity of the scholarly literature.

If a correction, editorial notice, or retraction is warranted, the journal will follow its applicable procedures and clearly identify the affected publication. Where feasible, the original publication record and relevant editorial notices will remain linked to maintain transparency regarding the article's publication history.

Pending the outcome of an investigation, the journal may consider an expression of concern when there are credible reasons to question the reliability of an article and the matter cannot be resolved promptly. Such action should be proportionate to the circumstances and should not be treated as a final determination of misconduct.

8. Institutional Cooperation

J-Dinamika recognizes that certain allegations, particularly those involving fabricated data, falsified implementation records, disputed authorship, or serious ethical violations, may require investigation by an author's institution or another competent authority.

Where appropriate, the journal may contact the relevant institution to request clarification, verification, or further investigation. The journal may share relevant information when necessary and lawful, while taking reasonable steps to protect confidential information and the rights of the individuals involved.

Institutional findings may inform the journal's decision, but the journal retains responsibility for determining appropriate editorial actions concerning manuscripts and articles published under its authority.

9. Documentation and Review of Cases

The editorial team should maintain appropriate records of allegations, relevant evidence, communications, decisions, and actions taken, subject to confidentiality and applicable retention requirements. These records support accountability, consistent decision-making, and the management of recurring or related concerns.

Procedures may be reviewed periodically to ensure that allegations are handled consistently with developments in publication ethics, research integrity, and applicable institutional requirements.

10. Commitment to Research Integrity

J-Dinamika is committed to protecting the credibility of community service scholarship and the reliability of the published record. All parties involved in the publication process are expected to act honestly, provide accurate information, respect ethical standards, and cooperate with reasonable efforts to resolve concerns about research or publication misconduct.

By submitting a manuscript to J-Dinamika, authors acknowledge that allegations of misconduct may be assessed in accordance with this policy and agree to cooperate with appropriate editorial inquiries.

Related policies: Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement; Plagiarism and Similarity Policy; Authorship Criteria; Conflict of Interest Policy; Generative AI Use Policy; and Corrections and Retractions Policy.