July 18, 2023

Fabrication of Imaginary Data in Submissions

What the journal will do if fabricated or unreal data is suspected.

Suspected fabricated data in a submitted manuscript:

1. A reviewer suspects irregularities regarding the data and informs the journal.

2. Seek the opinion of a second reviewer in the relevant field about the issue.

3. Thank the reviewers and inform them that an investigation will be conducted. Editors will investigate and gather complete documentary evidence if not already provided.

4. Verify whether the irregularities raised by the reviewer(s) are substantiated:

4.1) If no irregularities are found:
4.1.1) Inform the reviewers that no irregularities exist and advise the continuation of the article.

4.2) If minor irregularities are found:
4.2.1) Notify the author about the irregularities and request clarification along with corrections or modifications to the information in the manuscript.
4.2.2) Inform the reviewers about the identified issues and the corrective measures requested.

4.3) If significant irregularities are found:

4.3.1) Negative Scenario:
4.3.1.1) Notify the author of the identified irregularities in the submitted work.
4.3.1.1.1) If the author does not respond, send another letter highlighting the irregularities. If the author continues not to respond, reject the article and inform the reviewers about the activity and the resolution process.

4.3.2) Positive Scenario:
4.3.2.1) Notify the author of the identified irregularities in the submitted work.
4.3.2.2) If the author acknowledges the irregularities, inform them that the manuscript will be rejected. However, they will have another opportunity to resubmit to the journal if the work is revised.

4.3.3) Inform the reviewers about the decision made and the development of the process.

Click here to return to the main page of exceptional policies