Plagiarism & Retraction Policy
Last updated: September 2026
This page sets out how the International Journal of Agricultural Research, Innovation and Technology (IJARIT) protects the integrity of the scholarly record: how plagiarism and related misconduct are screened for and handled, and how published articles are withdrawn, corrected, flagged, or retracted. IJARIT follows the guidance and flowcharts published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including its retraction guidelines.
For authorship, conflicts of interest, AI-use rules, and the appeals process, see the Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement. For the review workflow, see Peer Review & Ethics.
Part A: Plagiarism and Research Integrity
1. What the journal treats as misconduct
IJARIT maintains a zero-tolerance policy for the following:
- Plagiarism: using another person's words, ideas, data, tables, or figures without proper attribution, including close paraphrasing that follows the source's wording or structure.
- Self-plagiarism and text recycling: reusing one's own previously published text, data, or figures without disclosure and citation.
- Duplicate or redundant submission and publication: submitting the same work, or slightly altered versions of it, to more than one journal, or splitting one study into several papers to inflate output.
- Data fabrication or falsification: inventing results, or altering or selectively omitting data.
- Image manipulation: inappropriate alteration or reuse of photographs, micrographs, gels, field images, or other figures.
- Citation manipulation: adding citations mainly to raise the citation counts of particular authors or journals.
- Undisclosed AI-generated content: see the AI policy in the Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement.
2. Permitted reuse of prior work
The following are not treated as self-plagiarism when they are clearly disclosed to the editor at submission and cited in the manuscript:
- Content derived from the authors' own thesis or dissertation.
- A preprint of the same manuscript (see the Author Guidelines).
- An abstract or poster presented at a conference, where it has not been published as a full paper.
- Brief descriptions of established methods that the authors have previously published, with citation.
3. Similarity screening
All submitted manuscripts, of every article type, are screened with Turnitin/iThenticate before peer review.
- Overall similarity must not exceed 15%, excluding reference lists, institutional affiliations, and standard methodology phrasing.
- Single-source similarity must remain below 3%.
A similarity score is an indicator, not a verdict. The editor examines the matched passages before any decision, and the score alone does not establish plagiarism. Manuscripts within the thresholds may still be returned or rejected if the review shows uncited copying. Manuscripts exceeding the thresholds are handled as follows:
| Finding | Action |
|---|---|
| Overlap that is limited, unintentional, and correctable (for example, missing quotation marks or insufficient paraphrasing) | Returned to the authors for revision and resubmission |
| Substantial overlap, or undisclosed reuse of the authors' own work | Rejected at screening, with a written explanation |
| Evidence of deliberate copying, fabrication, falsification, or duplicate submission | Rejected and referred for investigation under Section 4 |
4. Handling suspected misconduct before publication
- The editor documents the concern and the evidence, such as the similarity report and the matched sources.
- The corresponding author is informed in writing and given a reasonable deadline to respond (normally 14 days).
- The Editor-in-Chief, with the Editorial Board where needed, assesses the response, following the relevant COPE flowchart.
- The decision is communicated in writing with reasons. Authors may appeal under the process in the Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement.
5. Handling suspected misconduct after publication
Concerns raised about a published article, by readers, reviewers, editors, or institutions, are assessed by the same process. The journal may re-screen the article for similarity, examine the underlying data, and contact the authors and, where appropriate, their institution. Depending on the outcome, the journal issues a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction (Part B).
6. Sanctions
Sanctions are proportionate to the severity and intent of the breach:
| Severity | Examples | Possible sanctions |
|---|---|---|
| Minor | Unintentional citation or paraphrasing errors | Revision request and an educational note |
| Moderate | Substantial or undisclosed overlap, redundant submission | Rejection and a formal warning |
| Serious | Deliberate plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, duplicate publication | Rejection or retraction, notification of the authors' institution(s) and, where relevant, funder, and a restriction on future submissions to the journal for a defined period |
Part B: Withdrawal, Correction, Expression of Concern, and Retraction
7. Withdrawal
A corresponding author may withdraw a manuscript without penalty within 7 days of initial submission. Once a manuscript has entered peer review, typesetting, or publication, it cannot be withdrawn. If a serious problem emerges after that point, the matter is handled through the correction, expression-of-concern, or retraction procedures below.
8. Corrections
Errors that do not affect the scientific conclusions of a published article are handled through a formal notice linked to the original article:
- Erratum: corrects an error made by the journal or publisher during production.
- Corrigendum: corrects an error made by the authors.
The original article is not silently altered. Any change to the published version is accompanied by a dated notice.
9. Expression of concern
An expression of concern may be published when there is credible evidence of a serious problem but the investigation is ongoing or inconclusive, or when the authors' institution is not expected to conduct a fair investigation. The notice is linked to the article and is replaced by a correction or retraction once the matter is resolved.
10. Retraction
Grounds. An article is retracted when there is clear evidence that its findings are unreliable, whether through misconduct or honest error (for example, a calculation or experimental error that invalidates the results). Retraction is also used for plagiarism, duplicate publication, unethical research, or an authorship or consent problem that cannot be remedied by a correction.
Who may initiate. The journal, the authors, or an institution may request a retraction. The Editor-in-Chief decides after following the process in Section 4. A retraction for honest error carries no sanction against the authors.
How a retraction is shown.
- The article remains online and is clearly marked as retracted on its landing page and in the PDF, rather than deleted.
- A separate retraction notice, titled "Retraction: [article title]", states the reason and who initiated the retraction, and is linked to the original article in both directions.
- The article's Crossref metadata is updated to record the retraction, so that indexing services and readers are alerted.
11. Removal
An article is removed from public view only in exceptional circumstances, such as a court order, defamatory or unlawful content, or a serious risk to health or safety. A notice giving the reason replaces the content, and the bibliographic record is retained.
12. Fees
If an article is withdrawn after payment but before publication, or retracted because of an error attributable to the journal, the APC refund terms apply. An APC is not refunded where an article is retracted because of author misconduct.
Part C: Reporting and Contact
Concerns about plagiarism, data integrity, or a published article may be reported by anyone. Please provide the article citation or manuscript number, a description of the concern, and any supporting evidence. Reports are treated confidentially, and the person reporting is not required to identify themselves, although evidence-based reports can be acted on more readily. All parties are given a fair opportunity to respond before a decision is made.
Editorial Office: editor@ijarit.online
