The International Journal of Pesantren Studies (INJOPS) is committed to protecting the originality, reliability, and integrity of the scholarly record. The journal does not accept plagiarism, misappropriation of intellectual work, redundant publication, fabrication or falsification of research evidence, or other practices that undermine the credibility of published scholarship.

This policy explains how INJOPS assesses suspected plagiarism and publication misconduct, determines appropriate editorial action, and manages corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions. It is informed by the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applies to manuscripts under editorial consideration as well as articles already published by the journal.

1. Definition and Forms of Plagiarism

Plagiarism occurs when an author presents another person's words, ideas, research findings, interpretations, or intellectual contributions as their own without adequate acknowledgement. The journal considers both the extent of unattributed use and the significance of the material concerned.

Practices that may constitute plagiarism or related publication misconduct include:

• Verbatim plagiarism: Reproducing another author's text without appropriate quotation or attribution.
• Paraphrasing plagiarism: Rewriting another author's arguments or interpretations while concealing their original source.
• Misappropriation of ideas or findings: Presenting another researcher's original concepts, analyses, data, or discoveries without proper acknowledgement.
• Translation plagiarism: Translating previously published material and presenting it as an original contribution without acknowledging the source.
• Inappropriate text recycling: Reusing substantial portions of one's previously published material without necessary disclosure, citation, or justification.
• Redundant or duplicate publication: Publishing or submitting substantially overlapping research as separate original works without appropriate disclosure or a defensible scholarly justification.

Properly acknowledged quotations, established terminology, conventional methodological descriptions, and legitimate engagement with previously published scholarship do not automatically constitute plagiarism. Each case must be assessed in its academic context.

2. Similarity Screening and Editorial Assessment

Submitted manuscripts may be examined using similarity-detection software and other editorial screening methods. Such examination is intended to identify potentially problematic textual overlap and to support, rather than replace, independent editorial judgement.

A similarity percentage alone does not establish plagiarism. Similarity may arise from correctly attributed quotations, bibliographic references, widely used academic expressions, methodological terminology, or previously disclosed research materials.

Conversely, a low similarity percentage does not necessarily exclude plagiarism, particularly when ideas, research findings, translated passages, or substantially rephrased arguments have been appropriated without proper attribution.

Editorial assessment therefore considers the source of the overlapping material, the extent and significance of the similarity, the adequacy of attribution, the originality of the research contribution, and any explanation provided by the author. INJOPS does not treat an isolated numerical similarity score as sufficient grounds for an allegation of misconduct.

3. Integrity of Classical Texts and Islamic Scholarship

Research on pesantren, Islamic intellectual heritage (turāth), manuscripts, Qur'anic exegesis, hadith, jurisprudence, theology, philosophy, and related disciplines frequently requires extensive engagement with classical texts and established scholarly interpretations. INJOPS recognises that textual quotations and repeated traditional formulations may be integral to such research.

Authors must distinguish accurately between primary texts, later commentaries, editorial reconstructions, translations, and their own analyses. Quotations from classical works should be accompanied by sufficient source information to permit verification, including the relevant edition, volume, page, manuscript reference, or other appropriate locator.

The reuse of classical material is not inherently plagiarism. However, reproducing a modern scholar's translation, critical edition, textual reconstruction, original argument, or interpretive contribution without appropriate acknowledgement may constitute plagiarism or another form of intellectual misappropriation. Authors must also observe applicable copyright and licensing requirements.

4. Artificial Intelligence and Source Integrity

The use of generative artificial intelligence does not exempt authors from responsibility for originality, accurate citation, and the integrity of submitted research. Authors must verify all AI-assisted content, including references, quotations, translations, factual claims, and interpretations of primary sources.

AI-generated references that do not correspond to verifiable publications, fabricated quotations, misleading source attributions, and the presentation of machine-generated analysis as independently verified research evidence are unacceptable.

Substantive use of generative AI must be disclosed in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics policy. Authors remain accountable for any plagiarism, misrepresentation, or research integrity concerns arising from AI-assisted work.

5. Handling Suspected Plagiarism Before Publication

When suspected plagiarism or substantial textual overlap is identified during submission screening or peer review, the editorial team will examine the available evidence before determining the appropriate response.

1. Preliminary examination. The editor reviews the relevant passages, sources, similarity findings, and surrounding scholarly context.
2. Author clarification. Where a credible concern requires explanation, the corresponding author may be contacted and given an opportunity to respond.
3. Evaluation of evidence. The editor considers the author's explanation, the significance of the material concerned, and whether the problem affects the originality or reliability of the research.
4. Editorial determination. Depending on the circumstances, the manuscript may proceed, require correction or revision, undergo further assessment, or be rejected.
5. Further inquiry. Serious or unresolved concerns may be referred to relevant institutions or other appropriate parties when a formal investigation is warranted.

Minor attribution or quotation errors may be resolved through revision where the integrity of the underlying research remains intact. Substantial plagiarism, deliberate misrepresentation, or serious breaches of research integrity may justify rejection. An editorial decision will be based on the nature and substantiation of the concern rather than on an automatic similarity threshold.

6. Allegations Concerning Published Articles

Concerns about plagiarism, unreliable findings, duplicate publication, fabricated evidence, or other ethical problems may arise after an article has been published. INJOPS will assess credible reports regardless of whether they are submitted by authors, readers, reviewers, research institutions, or other parties.

Reports should identify the article concerned, explain the alleged problem, and provide supporting information where available. The editorial team will examine the evidence, seek clarification from the authors when appropriate, and determine whether further investigation is required.

Where institutional investigation is necessary, the journal may communicate with the relevant research institution while retaining responsibility for decisions concerning the published scholarly record. Editorial actions will be proportionate to the seriousness of the findings and the reliability of the evidence.

7. Corrections to Published Articles

A correction may be issued when a published article contains an error requiring public clarification but its principal findings and conclusions remain sufficiently reliable. Corrections may concern factual inaccuracies, significant citation errors, omitted acknowledgements, authorship information, or other matters that affect the accurate interpretation or attribution of the work.

Significant corrections should be documented through a clearly identifiable notice linked to the original article. The notice should describe the correction and preserve transparency concerning the published record. Minor typographical or formatting adjustments that do not affect scholarly interpretation may be handled as routine production corrections.

8. Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when serious questions about the reliability or integrity of a published article remain unresolved and the available evidence is insufficient to justify a definitive editorial action.

An expression of concern is intended to alert readers to a material uncertainty. It does not constitute a finding of misconduct or a retraction. Where further information becomes available, the journal may update or replace the notice with an appropriate correction, retraction, or statement resolving the concern.

9. Grounds for Retraction

Retraction may be appropriate when reliable evidence establishes that an article's findings, conclusions, or publication integrity are seriously compromised. Circumstances that may warrant retraction include:

• Substantial plagiarism or misappropriation of intellectual work.
• Fabricated, falsified, or materially unreliable research data or evidence.
• Serious errors that invalidate the principal findings or conclusions, including errors arising without deliberate misconduct.
• Redundant or duplicate publication that materially misrepresents the originality of the work.
• Serious ethical violations affecting the conduct or publication of the research.
• Compromised or manipulated peer review or other serious irregularities undermining the legitimacy of the publication process.

Retraction is not limited to cases of intentional misconduct. Articles may also require retraction when honest errors render their findings unreliable. The principal purpose of retraction is to correct the scholarly record and alert readers to material that should no longer be relied upon.

10. Retraction Procedure and Publication Notice

Before issuing a retraction, the editorial team will assess the available evidence and, where appropriate, seek an explanation from the authors or relevant institutions. The absence of unanimous author agreement does not prevent the journal from taking a necessary editorial action when the evidence sufficiently supports it.

A formal retraction notice will:

• Clearly identify the article being retracted, including its title, authors, and publication details.
• State that the article has been retracted and explain the substantive reasons for the decision.
• Identify the party responsible for issuing the retraction.
• Be publicly accessible and linked to the original publication.
• Distinguish established findings from unresolved allegations where appropriate.

Retracted articles will ordinarily remain accessible as part of the scholarly record, with their retracted status clearly indicated on the article page and, where practicable, in the article file and associated metadata. The original publication and its retraction notice should remain linked.

The journal will not silently replace a materially flawed published article with a revised version in a manner that obscures the editorial history of the publication. Significant post-publication actions must be documented transparently.

11. Article Removal

Removal of a published article is distinct from retraction and will be considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as a binding legal requirement, serious threats to personal safety, substantial privacy violations, or the unlawful disclosure of protected information.

Where removal is necessary, INJOPS will seek to preserve a public bibliographic record and an explanatory notice to the extent permitted by applicable law and the circumstances of the case.

12. Editorial Fairness and Appeals

Allegations of plagiarism and publication misconduct will be assessed on the basis of available evidence, with appropriate confidentiality and procedural fairness. Authors will normally be given an opportunity to respond to substantive concerns before a final decision is reached.

Authors may request reconsideration of an editorial action by presenting specific evidence of factual error, material procedural irregularity, or information relevant to the original determination. Appeals should be submitted through the journal's official editorial communication channels.

An appeal does not automatically suspend a correction, expression of concern, or retraction that the journal considers necessary to protect the scholarly record. The editorial team will consider relevant new evidence and determine whether the published notice requires amendment.

13. Relationship to Publication Ethics

This Plagiarism & Retraction Policy forms part of the journal's broader framework for research integrity and responsible scholarly publishing. It should be read together with the Publication Ethics policy, which sets out the responsibilities of authors, reviewers, editors, and the journal.

Questions or evidence concerning suspected plagiarism, unreliable research, or the integrity of a published article may be submitted to the editorial office through the official INJOPS website. The journal will determine the appropriate editorial response according to the nature of the concern and the available evidence.