Plagiarism and Research Misconduct

Plagiarism

Plagiarism, as defined by the World Association of Medical Editors, is “the use of others’ published and unpublished ideas or words (or other intellectual property) without attribution or permission, and presenting them as new and original rather than derived from an existing source.” There are four main forms of plagiarism: Direct plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, self-plagiarism (text recycling), and overlapping (“salami slicing”) publication.

Direct plagiarism, as defined by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI), is “the theft or misappropriation of intellectual property and the substantial unattributed textual copying of another’s work.” This includes “the unauthorized use of ideas or unique methods”.

How to avoid this: Never copy phrases, sentences, or paragraphs from another author's work, even briefly, without quotation marks and a citation. When describing another study's method, argument, or finding, paraphrase substantially in your own words and cite the source. We recommend running your own manuscript through a plagiarism-detection tool (e.g., iThenticate) before submission to catch unintentional overlaps.

Duplicate or redundant publication, according to ORI, is when content submitted for publication, or content that has already been published, is a near-verbatim or complete copy of one's own content that has already been published elsewhere and is not properly cited. This can include using the same dataset or the same materials and methods from a previous publication.

How to avoid this: Disclose any prior publication of the same data, results, or substantial content at the time of submission, even if it appeared in a different journal, conference proceeding, or language. If your manuscript builds on previously published work, cite that work explicitly and state clearly what is new in the current submission. Do not submit the same manuscript, or one with only cosmetic changes, to more than one journal at a time or in sequence.

“Text recycling” or self-plagiarism is similar to duplicate or redundant publication. It occurs when an author reuses portions of previously published work in a new manuscript without providing a citation to the original source(s). In some cases, this may be acceptable—for example, when writing the Materials and Methods section of a paper—provided that the original source is appropriately cited.

How to avoid this: Reusing your own methods description is generally acceptable when the underlying procedure is genuinely identical, but always cite the earlier publication where that method, dataset, or protocol was first reported. For introduction, discussion, or motivation text, write fresh wording for each new manuscript rather than reusing prior phrasing — this content is expected to reflect the specific framing of the new study. When in doubt, add a citation rather than omit one: being explicit about reuse is rarely penalized, but undisclosed reuse is.

“Salami slicing” or minor overlap, refers to the segmentation of one study into multiple publications with substantial overlap, where the overlap does not constitute clear recycling of a previous publication but nonetheless raises concerns regarding redundancy and transparency.

How to avoid this: If your study is part of a larger research program, state clearly in the manuscript how it differs from and relates to companion papers, and cite them. Avoid splitting a single dataset or experiment into multiple minimally-differentiated papers; consider whether the work would be stronger, clearer, and more transparent as a single, comprehensive publication. Disclose all related or companion manuscripts (submitted, in press, or published) to the editor at the time of submission.

A general note for authors: if you are ever uncertain whether reusing text, data, or a figure from your own or others' prior work is appropriate, the safest approach is to disclose it to the editor at submission and include a citation. Transparency about reuse is very rarely treated as misconduct; undisclosed reuse discovered later is treated far more seriously, regardless of intent.

Fabrication and Falsification of Data

Data fabrication is defined as making up data or results and recording or reporting them as if they were real.
Data falsification involves manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, or data such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. This includes altering, omitting, or selectively modifying data points or results to misrepresent findings.

Both fabrication and falsification are considered serious breaches of research integrity and are strictly prohibited.

Inappropriate Image Manipulation

Inappropriate image manipulation includes altering images in a way that misrepresents the original data. This may involve, but is not limited to, selectively enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing features within an image. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are permitted only if they are applied uniformly to the entire image and do not obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any information.

Authors may be required to provide original, unprocessed image files upon request.

Selective Reporting

Selective reporting refers to the deliberate omission, suppression, or incomplete reporting of data, results, methods, or outcomes that could influence the interpretation of the research. This includes reporting only favorable results while withholding negative, null, or contradictory findings, or deviating from prespecified analyses without appropriate disclosure and justification.

Authors are expected to present their research findings transparently, accurately, and completely.

Investigation of Alleged Misconduct

Should a case of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, selective reporting, or duplicate/redundant/overlapping publication be suspected or reported, InterPore Journal will take the necessary steps to investigate the matter. These steps may include, but are not limited to, submitting manuscript text to a screening tool such as Crossref Similarity Check or iThenticate, requesting original data or image files, and/or contacting the relevant institution(s). Investigations will be conducted in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and flowcharts.

Individuals wishing to raise concerns regarding potential research or publication misconduct, or to appeal editorial decisions, should consult the journal's Concerns, Complaints, Allegations and Appeals policy, which outlines the procedures for submitting and handling such matters. This policy is available at: https://ipjournal.interpore.org/index.php/interpore/CCAA.

For more information on plagiarism and publication ethics, please refer to the resources listed below, which were also consulted in the preparation of this policy.