Misconduct and Sanctions Policy

1. Overview
The International Journal of Pharmacy and Life Sciences (IJPLS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct in scientific publishing. We adhere to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines and expect all authors, reviewers, and editors to comply with ethical standards and best practices.
This policy defines misconduct, outlines what constitutes unethical behavior, and details the sanctions that may be imposed in response to such behavior.

2. Types of Misconduct
Scientific misconduct refers to any actions that undermine the integrity of the research or the publication process. The following types of misconduct are considered unacceptable by IJPLS:

  • Plagiarism:
    The act of using another person's work, ideas, or data without proper acknowledgment. This includes:
    • Copying text, tables, or figures from other works without citation.
    • Self-plagiarism (i.e., reusing substantial parts of previously published work without disclosure).
    • Falsifying or misrepresenting sources or citations.
  • Data Fabrication and Falsification:
    The intentional creation, alteration, or misrepresentation of data or research findings to achieve a desired outcome. This includes:
    • Fabricating data or research results.
    • Manipulating data to fit a hypothesis or expected results.
    • Altering images, graphs, or figures to misrepresent findings.
  • Duplicate or Redundant Publication:
    The submission or publication of the same research in more than one journal without proper disclosure. This includes:
    • Publishing the same data or manuscript in multiple journals without clear acknowledgment or approval.
    • Submitting a manuscript that has already been published as a preprint, without appropriate citation or transparency.
  • Authorship Misconduct:
    Disputes regarding authorship or incorrect attribution of authorship. This includes:
    • Adding authors who did not contribute to the research.
    • Excluding authors who made significant contributions to the work.
    • Misleading or fraudulent author affiliations.
  • Conflict of Interest (COI) Violations:
    Failing to disclose conflicts of interest (financial, personal, or professional) that could influence the objectivity of the research. This includes:
    • Failing to disclose financial support from companies that could have a vested interest in the outcomes of the research.
    • Undisclosed personal or professional relationships that could introduce bias.
  • Peer Review Misconduct:
    Unethical behavior during the peer review process. This includes:
    • Reviewer bias or failure to conduct an impartial review.
    • Sharing confidential information or using unpublished material from the manuscript for personal gain.
    • Failing to complete the peer review in a timely manner without valid reason.
  • Violation of Ethical Guidelines:
    Failure to adhere to established ethical guidelines for research. This includes:
    • Lack of proper ethical approval for studies involving humans or animals.
    • Failure to obtain informed consent from research participants.
    • Lack of transparency in disclosing research methods or data.

3. Detection of Misconduct
Misconduct may be detected in several ways:

  • Routine Screening:
    The journal uses plagiarism detection tools to check for copied content in submitted manuscripts. Any detected instances of plagiarism or data manipulation will be investigated.
  • Peer Review Process:
    Reviewers are responsible for identifying potential misconduct. If a reviewer suspects plagiarism, data manipulation, or unethical behavior, they must report it to the editorial team.
  • Complaints and Reports:
    If any party (e.g., authors, reviewers, or third parties) suspects misconduct, they may file a formal complaint with the editorial office.
  • Post-Publication Concerns:
    If misconduct is discovered after a manuscript has been published, such as through retraction requests or whistleblower reports, the journal will investigate the issue.

4. Sanctions for Misconduct
In cases of scientific misconduct, IJPLS will take appropriate actions in accordance with the severity of the issue. Possible sanctions include:

  • For Authors:
    • Rejection of Manuscript:
      If a manuscript is found to involve misconduct during the submission or review process, it will be rejected. The authors will be informed of the reason for the rejection.
    • Retraction of Published Article:
      If an article is found to contain misconduct after publication (e.g., plagiarism, data falsification), the article will be retracted, and a formal retraction notice will be issued. The retraction notice will explain the reasons for the retraction.
    • Banning from Future Submissions:
      Authors found guilty of serious misconduct (e.g., repeated plagiarism, data fabrication) may be banned from submitting manuscripts to IJPLS for a specified period or permanently.
    • Public Notification:
      In cases of severe misconduct, the journal may issue a public notice, including a statement of retraction or removal of the article from the journal’s archives. The article will be flagged as retracted with an explanation for the public record.
  • For Reviewers:
    • Exclusion from Future Reviews:
      Reviewers found to be engaging in unethical behavior (e.g., bias, conflicts of interest, failure to submit reviews) may be excluded from the journal’s reviewer pool.
    • Termination of Review Process:
      If a reviewer is found to be engaging in misconduct during the review process (e.g., sharing confidential information, making unfair decisions), their involvement in the review process will be terminated.
    • Public or Private Warning:
      Reviewers who violate ethical standards may receive a formal warning. Repeated violations may lead to permanent exclusion from the journal's review process.
  • For Editors:
    • Suspension or Removal:
      Editors found to have committed misconduct (e.g., bias, conflicts of interest, failure to disclose) will be suspended from their editorial duties while an investigation is conducted. In cases of severe misconduct, editors may be permanently removed from their editorial role.
    • Reevaluation of Editorial Decisions:
      If misconduct is detected in the editorial decision-making process, previously accepted manuscripts may be reevaluated, and decisions may be revised.
  • For the Journal:
    • Correction or Retraction Notices:
      If misconduct is identified after publication, the journal will issue a correction or retraction notice, explaining the nature of the misconduct and the corrective action taken.
    • Collaboration with Authorities:
      In cases of severe or criminal misconduct (e.g., data fabrication or ethical violations involving humans or animals), the journal will cooperate with relevant authorities, including academic institutions, funding bodies, or legal entities.

5. Procedure for Investigating Misconduct

  • Step 1: Reporting and Initial Assessment:
    Misconduct should be reported to the editorial office by email at [editor@ijpls.com]. The editorial team will conduct an initial assessment to determine the validity of the allegations.
  • Step 2: Investigation:
    If misconduct is suspected, the editorial board will launch a formal investigation. This may involve consulting additional reviewers or experts in the field, as well as reviewing the manuscript, peer review reports, and any relevant evidence.
  • Step 3: Decision:
    After the investigation, the editorial board will decide on the appropriate course of action. This may include retraction, correction, or other sanctions as outlined in this policy.
  • Step 4: Communication:
    The final decision will be communicated to the parties involved, including the author(s), reviewer(s), and any other relevant stakeholders. The decision will be made with transparency and in accordance with COPE guidelines.

6. Ethical Guidelines for Handling Misconduct
IJPLS adheres to the ethical guidelines set out by the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), ensuring that all allegations of misconduct are handled fairly, transparently, and promptly.

  • Fairness:
    All parties involved in a misconduct investigation will be treated fairly and given the opportunity to respond to allegations.
  • Transparency:
    The outcome of any investigation will be clearly communicated to the parties involved, and decisions will be based on evidence.
  • Confidentiality:
    Investigations into misconduct will be conducted confidentially, and the privacy of the individuals involved will be respected throughout the process.

7. Contact Information
For questions or to report potential misconduct, please contact the editorial office:
Email: [editor@ijpls.com]