Allegations of Research Misconduct
TAXPEDIA • SCHOLARLY INTEGRITY
Allegations of Research Misconduct
Evidence-based assessment, procedural fairness, and corrective editorial measures.
Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting (TAXPEDIA) is committed to the fair and responsible assessment of credible allegations affecting research integrity or publication ethics. The journal's procedures are informed by recognized ethical publishing principles, including COPE guidance.
1. Potential Research and Publication Misconduct
Examples include plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, manipulation of statistical results, invented references, misrepresentation of tax legislation or regulatory sources, improper duplicate publication, serious breaches of research confidentiality, fraudulent peer review, and material authorship manipulation.
2. Reporting Concerns
Reports should identify the manuscript or article, explain the suspected problem, and provide available supporting evidence. Authors, reviewers, readers, institutions, and other concerned parties may contact the Editorial Office. Anonymous reports may be assessed when the information is sufficiently specific and verifiable.
3. Preliminary Assessment and Inquiry
The Editor-in-Chief or an independent authorized editor assesses credibility and relevance. The journal may request source materials, author explanations, revised calculations, or expert assessment. Affected authors should ordinarily be given an opportunity to respond. Similarity or AI-detection percentages alone do not establish misconduct.
4. Editorial and Institutional Responsibilities
Editors are responsible for protecting the integrity of the journal's submission and publication records. Institutions and other competent authorities may be responsible for formal investigations involving research personnel, original data, legal violations, or misconduct beyond the journal's investigative capacity.
5. Possible Outcomes
Editorial responses may include clarification, further verification, additional review, revision, manuscript rejection, correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction. The response should be proportionate to the evidence and the effect of the problem on the reliability of the work.
6. Confidentiality, Documentation, and Appeals
Sensitive reports, correspondence, evidence, and decisions should be handled confidentially and documented appropriately. Editors with relevant conflicts must recuse themselves. Affected parties may submit reasoned procedural appeals through the journal's Complaints and Appeals mechanism.
Journal of Tax Policy, Economics, and Accounting (TAXPEDIA)
MUC Tax Research Institute • Online ISSN 2987-5366


