Research misconduct refers to actions or behaviors that violate accepted standards of responsible research and publication.

Examples of research misconduct include, but are not limited to:

• Fabrication of research data or results;
• Falsification, manipulation, or inappropriate modification of data, images, or research findings;
• Plagiarism or unauthorized use of others’ intellectual contributions;
• Duplicate or redundant publication;
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest affecting research interpretation;
• Manipulation of the peer-review process;
• Improper authorship practices, including guest authorship, gift authorship, or ghost authorship;
• Failure to comply with research ethics requirements;
• Misrepresentation of research methods, results, or conclusions.

Concerns regarding possible research misconduct may be reported by:

• Authors;
• Reviewers;
• Editors;
• Researchers;
• Readers;
• Institutions;
• Other relevant stakeholders.

Reports should provide sufficient information and supporting evidence to allow appropriate evaluation.

Allegations may concern:

• Submitted manuscripts;
• Manuscripts under peer review;
• Published articles;
• Research data;
• Authorship issues;
• Peer-review processes.

AGRITROP encourages individuals reporting concerns to provide specific details, relevant documentation, and supporting evidence whenever possible.

All allegations of misconduct are handled confidentially.

The identity of individuals reporting misconduct will be protected whenever possible, and information related to investigations will only be shared with individuals directly involved in the evaluation process.

Editors, reviewers, and investigators must maintain confidentiality and avoid unnecessary disclosure of allegations before a final decision is reached.

AGRITROP follows COPE recommendations that journals should handle allegations of misconduct confidentially, fairly, and objectively while protecting the rights of all parties involved (COPE, Core Practices).

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or designated editorial representative will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the concern has sufficient basis for further investigation.

The initial assessment may include:

• Reviewing the allegation and available evidence;
• Checking manuscript records and publication history;
• Examining similarity reports or relevant documentation;
• Consulting appropriate editors or experts when necessary.

If the allegation is found to be unsupported, no further action will be taken.

If sufficient concerns exist, AGRITROP will proceed with a formal investigation.

When a formal investigation is required, AGRITROP may:

1. Review all available evidence;
2. Contact the authors for clarification;
3. Request supporting documents or research records;
4. Consult independent experts;
5. Contact the authors’ institution or relevant authority when necessary.

Authors involved in an investigation will be given an opportunity to respond to allegations and provide explanations or evidence.

The investigation process aims to ensure fairness, due process, and an evidence-based decision.

AGRITROP follows COPE procedures that recommend journals investigate suspected misconduct carefully, communicate with relevant parties, and take appropriate action based on available evidence (COPE, Flowcharts and Guidelines).

Based on the outcome of the investigation, AGRITROP may take one or more of the following actions:

Actions will depend on the severity, impact, and nature of the misconduct.

AGRITROP follows COPE recommendations regarding corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions to maintain the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record (COPE, Retraction Guidelines).

AGRITROP considers fabrication and falsification of research data as serious forms of misconduct.

Examples include:

• Inventing experimental results;
• Removing or altering data without justification;
• Manipulating images or figures to misrepresent findings;
• Reporting results that cannot be supported by original research evidence.

Authors must maintain appropriate research records and provide supporting information when requested during an investigation.

AGRITROP recognizes that authorship disputes may affect the integrity of scientific publishing.

Concerns regarding:

• Unauthorized authorship;
• Missing authors;
• Incorrect author order;
• Disagreement regarding contributions;

will be handled according to the journal’s Authorship Criteria Policy and applicable publication ethics principles.

AGRITROP follows COPE recommendations that authorship should accurately reflect genuine contributions and accountability for published research (COPE, Authorship and Contributorship).

AGRITROP considers manipulation of the peer-review process a serious ethical violation.

Examples include:

• Providing fabricated reviewer identities;
• Suggesting reviewers with undisclosed conflicts of interest;
• Attempting to influence reviewer decisions improperly;
• Interfering with editorial independence.

Suspected peer-review manipulation will be investigated according to journal procedures and may result in rejection, article withdrawal, or further institutional action.

Authors who disagree with editorial decisions related to misconduct investigations may submit a formal appeal with supporting explanations.

Appeals must:

• Clearly identify the reason for disagreement;
• Provide relevant evidence;
• Be submitted within a reasonable timeframe.

Appeals will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent editorial authority.

Authors submitting manuscripts to AGRITROP agree that:

• Research has been conducted ethically;
• Data and results are accurately reported;
• All contributors are appropriately recognized;
• Conflicts of interest are disclosed;
• Research records can be provided when required;
• They will cooperate with investigations of suspected misconduct.

AGRITROP is committed to protecting the integrity of the scientific record by responding appropriately to allegations of research misconduct.

All investigations are conducted fairly, confidentially, and based on evidence while respecting the rights of authors, reviewers, and other parties involved.

AGRITROP follows international publication ethics standards established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to promote responsible research practices and maintain trust in scholarly communication (COPE, Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing).