Plagiarism and Research Integrity Policy

The Malaysian Journal of Computing and Engineering Technology (MJCET) is committed to maintaining originality, accuracy and integrity in scholarly publishing. The journal does not tolerate plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification, citation manipulation or other practices that undermine the credibility of scholarly research.

All submitted manuscripts are subject to originality screening and editorial assessment. MJCET applies the principles of responsible scholarly publishing and draws on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and relevant guidance when assessing suspected misconduct.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors and Editorial Board members throughout submission, peer review, publication and post-publication assessment.

1. Scope of Originality Screening

MJCET screens submitted manuscripts for originality and potential publication ethics concerns before external peer review. Additional checks may be conducted during revision, before acceptance or after publication when concerns arise.

Screening may identify:

• Textual plagiarism: using another person's words or expressions without appropriate acknowledgement.
• Idea plagiarism: presenting another person's concepts, arguments or intellectual contributions as one's own without proper attribution.
• Improper paraphrasing: reproducing the substance or structure of another work without adequate acknowledgement.
• Self-plagiarism: reusing previously published material without appropriate citation or disclosure.
• Duplicate or redundant publication: publishing substantially overlapping work without adequate justification or transparent disclosure.
• Inappropriate reuse of figures, tables, images or data: reproducing material without proper attribution, required permission or disclosure.
• Citation manipulation: including irrelevant or excessive references to improperly influence citation metrics or scholarly evaluation.
• Other research integrity concerns: including suspected fabrication, falsification, inappropriate image manipulation or undisclosed simultaneous submission.

MJCET uses recognised similarity-detection software, such as Turnitin or an equivalent service, alongside editorial judgement. Similarity screening is a preliminary assessment tool and does not, by itself, establish whether plagiarism or other misconduct has occurred.

2. Similarity Reports and Indicative Reference Levels

MJCET evaluates similarity reports contextually rather than relying exclusively on a numerical score. The editorial assessment considers:

• the proportion, location and nature of overlapping text;
• whether the overlap affects the manuscript’s original arguments, analysis, findings or conclusions;
• the adequacy of citations, quotations and acknowledgements;
• the extent of overlap with a single source or with the authors’ previous publications;
• the legitimate use of standard technical terminology, equations or methodological descriptions; and
• whether the overlap indicates possible unattributed copying, duplicate publication or other ethical concerns.

For initial screening, MJCET uses the following indicative similarity reference levels:

• Overall similarity: 20% or below
• Similarity from a single source: 5% or below

These figures are screening references, not automatic acceptance thresholds or definitive evidence of plagiarism. A manuscript below these levels may still contain serious unattributed copying, while a manuscript above them may contain legitimate overlap.

References, properly identified quotations and standard technical or methodological expressions may be excluded from the assessment where the software permits. Editors must nevertheless examine the underlying report to ensure that exclusions do not conceal problematic overlap.

Manuscripts exceeding the indicative levels may be returned for clarification or revision, subjected to further investigation or rejected where substantial ethical concerns are established. Editors may also reject a manuscript at any similarity level if the evidence indicates serious misconduct.

3. Acceptable and Unacceptable Overlap

3.1 Acceptable overlap

Depending on the context, the following may be acceptable:

• properly cited quotations reproduced within appropriate limits;
• references and bibliographic entries;
• standard technical terminology and conventional methodological descriptions;
• accurately attributed descriptions of established theories, procedures or technical standards; and
• transparently disclosed and appropriately cited reuse of material where permitted by the relevant copyright or licensing conditions.

Acceptable overlap must not obscure the manuscript’s original contribution or misrepresent previously published material as new.

3.2 Unacceptable practices

The following practices are prohibited:

• copying text, ideas, data or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgement;
• paraphrasing another person's work without adequate attribution;
• submitting the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals;
• publishing substantially overlapping work without disclosure or a legitimate scholarly justification;
• dividing a single body of research into multiple papers primarily to increase publication output without sufficient distinct contributions;
• reusing previously published text, figures, tables or data in a misleading manner;
• misrepresenting the originality or novelty of a manuscript; and
• manipulating citations to inflate citation counts or improperly influence scholarly evaluation.

Editors will assess suspected cases according to the evidence, the nature of the overlap and the applicable publication ethics standards.

4. Plagiarism, Self-Plagiarism and Redundant Publication

Plagiarism occurs when authors present another person's words, ideas, findings, data or other intellectual contributions as their own without appropriate acknowledgement.

Self-plagiarism refers to the inappropriate reuse of an author's previously published material without adequate citation, disclosure or differentiation from the new contribution. Authors must clearly acknowledge relevant previous work and explain the original contribution of the submitted manuscript.

Redundant or duplicate publication occurs when substantially the same research findings or content are published more than once without appropriate disclosure or justification. Authors must disclose related manuscripts, previous publications and overlapping outputs during submission.

Prior conference papers, preprints, theses or other publicly available research outputs must be disclosed where relevant and handled according to MJCET’s submission and publication policies. Such prior dissemination does not automatically constitute misconduct, but authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript satisfies the journal’s originality requirements and clearly identifies its contribution beyond the earlier work.

Editors may request copies of related publications or submissions to determine whether sufficient new scholarly content is present.

5. Data, Figures, Images and Research Integrity

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, authenticity and integrity of the data, figures, images, code and other research materials presented in their manuscripts.

MJCET prohibits:

• Data fabrication: inventing data, observations, results or research activities.
• Data falsification: manipulating research materials, processes, data or results in a way that misrepresents the research record.
• Misleading image manipulation: altering images or visual evidence in a manner that distorts or conceals relevant findings.
• Unauthorised or undisclosed reuse: reproducing figures, tables, images, datasets or other protected materials without appropriate attribution, permission where required or disclosure.

Authors must report research methods and results accurately and provide supporting documentation when reasonably requested by the journal. Editors may request original image files, relevant data, analytical outputs, permissions or other evidence necessary to assess a concern.

Legitimate processing or enhancement of images and data must be consistent with accepted disciplinary practices, appropriately disclosed where necessary and must not distort the evidence.

6. Editorial Screening Procedures

MJCET conducts originality and research integrity checks at appropriate stages of the editorial process.

Initial submission: The editorial office or designated editor screens the manuscript for similarity, originality, completeness and potential publication ethics concerns before external peer review.

Revision: Further screening may be conducted when substantial text changes are made, concerns arise from reviewer comments or the revised manuscript contains potentially problematic overlap.

Before acceptance or publication: Additional checks may be performed where necessary to resolve outstanding concerns or verify the originality and integrity of the final manuscript.

After publication: The journal may investigate allegations or evidence of misconduct that emerge after publication.

Similarity reports are assessed by the editorial office, the handling editor or another appropriately authorised person. Editors must interpret reports in context rather than treating a software-generated score as a final decision.

All screening and investigation records must be handled confidentially and accessed only by individuals with legitimate editorial responsibilities.

7. Investigation of Suspected Misconduct

When MJCET identifies suspected plagiarism or another research integrity concern, the journal will assess the available evidence and follow a fair and documented process.

The process may include:

1. Preliminary assessment of the allegation, similarity report or other evidence.
2. Examination of the relevant text, sources, data, figures or publication history.
3. A request for an explanation or supporting documentation from the corresponding author and, where appropriate, other authors.
4. Further assessment by the handling editor, Editor-in-Chief or an independent expert where necessary.
5. Consideration of the response and available evidence before a decision is made.
6. Documentation of the outcome and implementation of appropriate action.

The journal will give the individuals concerned a reasonable opportunity to respond before making a final determination, where appropriate. The nature and extent of the investigation will depend on the seriousness and complexity of the concern.

If a matter requires institutional investigation or falls outside the journal’s authority, MJCET may refer the matter to the relevant institution, employer, funder or other appropriate body. The journal will not treat an unverified allegation as established misconduct.

8. Editorial Actions and Sanctions

MJCET applies proportionate sanctions based on the seriousness of the breach, the strength of the evidence, the extent of the affected material, the author’s response and whether the conduct appears deliberate, reckless or repeated.

Depending on the circumstances, actions may include:

For manuscripts under consideration

• requesting clarification, additional documentation or correction of an incomplete disclosure;
• requiring revision where the issue is minor and can be resolved appropriately;
• suspending editorial consideration while an investigation is conducted; or
• rejecting the manuscript where plagiarism, serious ethical breaches or other unacceptable integrity concerns are established.

For published articles

• publishing a correction where the problem can be remedied without undermining the overall reliability of the article;
• issuing an expression of concern while a significant unresolved matter is investigated; or
• retracting the article where the reliability or integrity of the published work is materially compromised.

For serious or repeated misconduct

• restricting or declining future submissions from the individuals concerned for a proportionate period;
• notifying the relevant institution, employer or funder where justified and appropriate; or
• taking other appropriate measures consistent with the journal’s publication ethics procedures.

A temporary submission restriction will be considered only after an assessment of the evidence and circumstances. Any restriction must be proportionate, documented and applied consistently. MJCET will not impose a permanent or automatic ban solely because a similarity threshold has been exceeded.

Where necessary, the journal may also take appropriate action concerning reviewers or editors whose conduct compromises research integrity or editorial independence.

9. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal a decision based on alleged plagiarism or research misconduct by submitting a written request to the editorial office. The appeal must explain the grounds for reconsideration and provide relevant supporting evidence.

The Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately appointed independent editor will review the appeal. An individual involved in the original decision must not determine the appeal where a conflict of interest exists.

The journal may seek additional expert advice or documentation before reaching a conclusion. The outcome and principal reasons will be communicated to the relevant parties. The decision is final within the journal’s editorial process.

Complaints about the handling of suspected misconduct may be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief. Complaints involving the Editor-in-Chief will be referred to an appropriate independent authority within the journal’s publishing organisation.

10. Post-Publication Monitoring and Transparency

MJCET recognises its responsibility to preserve the integrity of the published scholarly record. The journal may investigate credible concerns raised by authors, readers, reviewers, institutions or other parties after publication.

Where corrective action is necessary, MJCET will publish an appropriate correction, expression of concern or retraction notice, depending on the nature and significance of the problem.

Notices must explain the reason for the action sufficiently to inform readers while respecting applicable confidentiality and legal requirements. Corrections and retractions must be clearly linked to the original article so that readers can identify the affected publication and understand its status.

The journal may notify relevant institutions or other responsible organisations where the evidence warrants such action. All post-publication measures will be documented and managed in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics procedures.

11. Author Responsibilities

All authors are responsible for ensuring that their submissions are original, accurately reported and appropriately referenced. Before submission, authors must:

• verify the originality of the manuscript and acknowledge all relevant sources;
• obtain permission for the use of copyrighted material where required;
• disclose related publications, manuscripts and overlapping research outputs;
• ensure that data, figures, images, citations and references are accurate;
• confirm that all listed authors have approved the final manuscript and accept responsibility for their contributions; and
• cooperate with reasonable editorial requests for clarification or supporting evidence.

Authors must not knowingly submit fabricated, falsified, plagiarised or misleading material. Failure to comply with these responsibilities may result in rejection, correction, retraction or other proportionate action under this policy.