1. Scope of Research Misconduct

For the purposes of this policy, research misconduct encompasses serious departures from accepted standards of research integrity that may compromise the reliability, authenticity, or ethical standing of scholarly work.

Concerns warranting editorial examination may include fabrication or falsification of research data, plagiarism, misrepresentation of research procedures, undisclosed manipulation of evidence, and other practices that materially undermine the trustworthiness of a manuscript or published article.

Within communication research, such concerns may also involve the invention or alteration of interview transcripts, the selective misrepresentation of participants' accounts, the fabrication of field observations, the manipulation of media or digital datasets, and the presentation of constructed narratives as authentic empirical findings.

Particular attention is given to allegations involving the unauthorised disclosure of participants' identities, the misuse of confidential communications, or the misrepresentation of consent in research involving individuals, communities, or culturally sensitive settings.

Not every methodological limitation, interpretive disagreement, or unintentional error constitutes research misconduct. The journal distinguishes between honest scholarly differences, remediable errors, and conduct that raises substantive concerns about research integrity.

The broader ethical obligations applicable to submitted and published manuscripts are defined in the journal's Publication Ethics policy.

2. Reporting Allegations

Concerns about suspected research misconduct may be brought to the attention of the editorial office by authors, reviewers, readers, research participants, institutional representatives, or other individuals with relevant information.

Reports should be submitted in writing and should identify the manuscript or published article concerned, describe the alleged irregularity, and provide any relevant evidence or supporting documentation that is reasonably available.

Where possible, reports should include sufficient detail to enable an initial assessment without requiring the complainant to undertake an independent investigation.

Allegations may be submitted through the journal's official editorial contact:

Jurnal Communio Editorial Office

Email: jikom@undana.ac.id

The journal will consider reports made in good faith, including those submitted without disclosure of the complainant's identity, provided that the information is sufficiently specific and credible to warrant further examination.

The identity of a complainant will be treated confidentially to the extent reasonably possible, subject to applicable legal obligations and the requirements of a fair assessment.

3. Preliminary Editorial Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief, or an appropriately designated editor, will undertake a preliminary assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the scope of research misconduct and whether the available information warrants further examination.

The initial assessment may involve reviewing the manuscript, relevant published materials, editorial correspondence, research documentation, or other evidence directly related to the allegation.

Where an editor has a personal, professional, institutional, or other significant conflict of interest, responsibility for handling the matter will be assigned to an uninvolved editor or an appropriate representative of the publisher.

The journal will avoid premature conclusions and will not treat the existence of an allegation as evidence that misconduct has occurred.

Where the concern is insufficiently substantiated, the editorial office may request additional information or close the matter if no reasonable grounds for further examination are identified.

4. Examination and Right of Response

Where a concern warrants further consideration, the editorial office will ordinarily contact the corresponding author and, where appropriate, other authors or relevant parties to request clarification.

Authors will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the concerns raised and to provide relevant explanations or supporting materials. Depending on the nature of the allegation, these may include research instruments, methodological records, appropriately de-identified data, analytical documentation, or evidence of relevant ethical permissions.

Requests for supporting materials will take account of legal restrictions, data protection obligations, research confidentiality, and commitments made to participants.

The editorial team may consult independent methodological or subject specialists where additional expertise is required to assess the credibility of the available evidence.

In communication research involving identifiable participants, private conversations, digital communities, or culturally sensitive information, verification procedures must not expose research participants to avoidable harm or compromise legitimate confidentiality agreements.

Where concerns extend beyond the journal's capacity or authority to establish the relevant facts, the matter may be referred to the authors' institution, research ethics committee, or another competent body for further examination.

The journal's responsibility is to determine the implications of the available evidence for editorial decisions and the reliability of the scholarly record. Formal findings of institutional research misconduct ordinarily remain the responsibility of the competent investigative authority.

5. Editorial Decisions and Corrective Measures

The journal will determine its editorial response on the basis of the seriousness of the concern, the reliability of the available evidence, the authors' explanations, and any findings provided by an appropriate institutional authority.

For manuscripts under consideration, the editorial office may request clarification or revision, suspend editorial processing while substantial concerns are examined, or reject the submission where serious integrity problems are sufficiently established.

For published articles, the journal may initiate corrective action in accordance with its Publication Ethics policy and relevant COPE guidance.

Such action may include a correction where the scholarly record can be reliably amended, an expression of concern where substantial unresolved questions remain, or a retraction where the findings or publication record can no longer be regarded as reliable.

The nature of any corrective action will reflect the evidence and circumstances of the individual case. An allegation alone will not constitute sufficient grounds for retraction.

Where appropriate, the journal will ensure that published notices are clearly identified, accessible to readers, and linked to the article concerned.

6. Confidentiality, Fairness, and Record-Keeping

Jurnal Communio approaches allegations of research misconduct with due regard for procedural fairness, confidentiality, and the professional rights of all parties concerned.

Information obtained during the assessment process will be shared only with individuals whose involvement is reasonably necessary for resolving the matter, or where disclosure is required by law or legitimate institutional procedures.

The editorial office will maintain appropriate records of allegations, relevant correspondence, evidence considered, and editorial actions taken.

Reports will be handled without discrimination, retaliation, or preferential treatment based on professional status, institutional affiliation, or personal relationships.

The journal will seek to address concerns within a reasonable period, recognising that complex cases, particularly those requiring external institutional examination, may take additional time to resolve.

Where appropriate, the individual who raised the concern will be informed that the matter has been considered and whether editorial action has been taken, subject to confidentiality requirements.

7. Relationship to Other Editorial Policies

This policy should be read in conjunction with the journal's Publication Ethics, Screening for Plagiarism, Authorship Criteria, and other applicable editorial policies.

Allegations concerning the integrity of research or the scholarly record are addressed under the present policy. Routine disagreements with editorial decisions and general procedural complaints are handled under the journal's Complaints and Appeals provisions.

Questions concerning author eligibility, author order, or changes to authorship should ordinarily be considered under the Authorship Criteria policy, unless they indicate broader research or publication misconduct.

Any correction, expression of concern, or retraction resulting from an established integrity concern will be managed in accordance with the journal's existing publication ethics procedures.