This policy establishes the principles and procedures for reporting, assessing, investigating, and responding to suspected research misconduct involving manuscripts submitted to or articles published in SCIENTIA. All allegations are evaluated on the basis of available evidence, with due consideration for fairness, confidentiality, procedural integrity, and the rights of all parties involved. An allegation alone does not establish that misconduct has occurred.

1. Scope of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct may take various forms, including but not limited to the following:

2. Reporting Procedure

2.1. Submitting a Concern

Anyone who suspects research misconduct involving a manuscript submitted to or an article published in SCIENTIA may report the concern to the journal's editorial office through the official contact details provided on the journal's website.

To facilitate a responsible assessment, reports should include the following information where available:

• The title of the manuscript or published article and its DOI or URL, if available.
• A clear description of the suspected misconduct and the specific issues of concern.
• Supporting evidence, such as source comparisons, relevant documents, data inconsistencies, or other verifiable information.
• Any additional information that may assist the editorial team in evaluating the allegation.

2.2. Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon receiving a report, the editorial team will assess whether the allegation is sufficiently specific and supported by information that warrants further examination. Where appropriate, receipt of the report will be acknowledged. The initial assessment may involve examining the manuscript, publication records, similarity reports, research materials, relevant correspondence, and other available evidence.

If a report lacks sufficient detail, the journal may request clarification or additional supporting information. The journal may decide not to proceed when an allegation is unsupported or falls outside its remit. No conclusion of misconduct will be drawn solely from the submission of an allegation.

3. Investigation and Author Response

When further examination is warranted, SCIENTIA may take one or more of the following steps, depending on the nature, seriousness, and circumstances of the allegation:

4. Principles Governing Investigations

5. Possible Editorial Actions

Depending on the findings, the stage of publication, and the seriousness of the concern, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

• Manuscript Rejection: Reject a submitted manuscript when serious ethical concerns are substantiated or the manuscript fails to meet the journal's publication requirements.
• Correction: Publish a correction when an identified error can be adequately addressed without retracting the article.
• Expression of Concern: Publish an expression of concern when substantial questions remain unresolved and readers need to be informed while further investigation is pending.
• Retraction: Retract a published article when the evidence and applicable editorial policies justify retraction to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.
• Other Appropriate Measures: Take additional action when warranted, including contacting relevant institutions or authorities, correcting publication metadata, or documenting the outcome of an investigation as appropriate.

6. Protecting the Scholarly Record

SCIENTIA is committed to preserving the accuracy, reliability, and transparency of the scholarly record. When editorial action is necessary, the journal will communicate relevant decisions through appropriate notices linked to the affected article, where applicable.

Public notices will provide sufficient information to explain the editorial action while respecting confidentiality, applicable legal obligations, and the rights of the parties involved. The journal may update the publication record when new evidence or subsequent developments warrant further action.