Research Misconduct & Whistleblower Policy

Research Misconduct & Whistleblower Policy

Agricultural Science Horizons (ASH), published by the Gondars Institute of Research and Skill Development (GIRSD), is committed to safeguarding research integrity, publication ethics, transparency, and the reliability of the scholarly record. The journal strictly adheres to internationally recognized ethical standards and follows the principles and recommendations established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing endorsed by DOAJ, COPE, OASPA, and WAME, as well as quality expectations commonly required by Scopus and Web of Science indexed journals.

The journal maintains a zero-tolerance approach toward research misconduct and encourages all members of the scholarly community to report suspected ethical violations in good faith.

1. Purpose and Scope

This policy establishes procedures for identifying, reporting, investigating, and resolving allegations of research misconduct involving submitted, accepted, or published manuscripts. The policy applies to authors, co-authors, editors, editorial board members, reviewers, guest editors, journal staff, publishers, and any third party involved in the publication process.

The policy applies before submission, during peer review, after acceptance, and after publication.

2. Definition of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct refers to intentional actions or serious negligence that compromise the integrity, reliability, transparency, or ethical standards of scholarly research and publication.

Examples of research misconduct include, but are not limited to, data fabrication, data falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, image manipulation, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, paper mill activities, authorship misconduct, unethical use of artificial intelligence tools, undisclosed conflicts of interest, unethical research involving humans or animals, unethical data acquisition, and deliberate concealment of research limitations.

Honest errors, legitimate differences in scientific interpretation, and unintentional mistakes identified and corrected promptly do not automatically constitute research misconduct.

3. Types of Misconduct Recognized by the Journal

Data Fabrication and Data Falsification

Fabrication includes inventing data, experiments, participants, field observations, laboratory results, images, or analytical outputs that never existed. Falsification includes manipulating, selectively reporting, omitting, or altering research data, methodologies, statistical analyses, images, or results to misrepresent findings.

Plagiarism and Redundant Publication

Plagiarism includes copying text, ideas, figures, tables, methodologies, images, datasets, or unpublished materials without proper acknowledgement. Redundant publication includes duplicate submissions, salami slicing, and publishing substantially similar content in multiple journals without disclosure.

Peer Review and Citation Manipulation

Misconduct includes submitting false reviewer identities, creating fake reviewer accounts, manipulating reviewer recommendations, coercing citations, excessive self-citation, citation cartels, and intentionally inflating bibliometric indicators.

Authorship Misconduct

The journal prohibits guest authorship, honorary authorship, ghost authorship, purchased authorship, unauthorized inclusion or removal of authors, and fraudulent contribution statements.

Image and Digital Manipulation

Images, graphs, electrophoresis gels, microscopy figures, maps, and other visual materials must accurately represent original findings. Undisclosed alterations that modify scientific interpretation are prohibited.

Artificial Intelligence Misuse

Artificial intelligence tools may not fabricate data, generate fictitious references, manipulate peer review, create false research outcomes, or replace human responsibility for scientific content. Authors remain fully accountable for all submitted work.

4. Whistleblower Protection Policy

Agricultural Science Horizons strongly encourages responsible reporting of suspected misconduct.

Whistleblowers may include authors, readers, reviewers, editors, institutions, funding agencies, students, research participants, or members of the public.

Individuals reporting concerns in good faith shall be protected from retaliation, intimidation, discrimination, harassment, or professional disadvantage.

The journal accepts reports regardless of whether the whistleblower chooses to disclose their identity. Anonymous allegations may be investigated if sufficient evidence is provided.

The journal will maintain confidentiality throughout the investigative process to the maximum extent possible while ensuring a fair evaluation.

5. Reporting Suspected Misconduct

Reports of suspected misconduct should be submitted to the editorial office with clear supporting evidence.

The report should include the article title, manuscript identification number if available, names of involved individuals, a detailed description of concerns, supporting documents, relevant screenshots, datasets, similarity reports, or any other available evidence.

Malicious, knowingly false, defamatory, or frivolous allegations may themselves constitute unethical conduct.

6. Investigation Procedures

Every allegation will be handled confidentially, objectively, impartially, and without unnecessary delay.

The editorial office will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether sufficient evidence exists.

If concerns are substantiated, the corresponding author will be contacted and given an opportunity to respond.

The journal may request original datasets, laboratory records, ethics approvals, informed consent documentation, image source files, statistical code, institutional approvals, and other supporting materials.

Independent experts may be consulted when specialized technical evaluation is necessary.

Where appropriate, the journal may contact employers, research institutions, ethics committees, or funding agencies to conduct formal investigations.

The journal reserves the right to suspend editorial processing during ongoing investigations.

7. Editorial Actions and Corrective Measures

Depending on the severity and evidence available, Agricultural Science Horizons may implement one or more corrective actions.

These actions may include manuscript rejection, suspension of peer review, publication of corrections, publication of expressions of concern, article retraction, removal of supplementary materials, temporary or permanent submission bans, notification of affiliated institutions, and notification of funding agencies or regulatory authorities when legally required.

Any post-publication amendments shall remain transparent and permanently linked to the scholarly record.

8. Retractions, Corrections, and Expressions of Concern

If errors or misconduct are discovered after publication, the journal shall preserve the integrity of the scientific record through transparent post-publication notices.

A correction will be issued when errors do not invalidate the primary conclusions.

An expression of concern may be published when investigations remain incomplete but serious concerns exist.

A retraction will be issued when findings become unreliable due to misconduct, significant errors, unethical practices, or manipulation of the publication process.

Retracted articles shall remain accessible for transparency purposes but will be clearly identified as retracted.

9. Responsibilities of Authors, Reviewers, and Editors

Authors are responsible for ensuring accuracy, originality, transparency, data availability, ethical compliance, and honest reporting.

Reviewers are responsible for maintaining confidentiality, reporting ethical concerns, declaring conflicts of interest, and identifying suspicious content.

Editors are responsible for conducting impartial assessments, protecting confidentiality, avoiding conflicts of interest, and implementing ethical procedures consistently.

GIRSD and the editorial board shall continuously strengthen research integrity mechanisms, editorial training, and quality assurance systems.

10. Record Retention and Research Integrity Monitoring

The journal reserves the right to retain all editorial communications, peer review records, similarity reports, ethical correspondence, investigation files, and misconduct documentation for an appropriate period to ensure accountability and auditability.

Agricultural Science Horizons may use plagiarism detection software, image analysis tools, metadata analysis, reviewer verification systems, artificial intelligence detection support tools, and other integrity screening mechanisms to identify suspicious activities.

11. Policy Review and International Compliance

This policy shall be reviewed periodically to align with evolving international standards and best practices in scholarly publishing.

Agricultural Science Horizons and GIRSD are committed to maintaining transparency, accountability, fairness, and research integrity in accordance with the principles promoted by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, WAME, and internationally recognized standards expected by Scopus and Web of Science indexed journals.

12. Contact Information

Questions, concerns, or reports regarding suspected research misconduct may be submitted confidentially to the Editorial Office of Agricultural Science Horizons.

Gondars Institute of Research and Skill Development (GIRSD)

For Principle Contact: admin@girsd.com