Plagiarism Policy

Indonesian Journal of Socio-Cultural Learning (IJSL) is committed to publishing original scholarly work and maintaining the integrity of the academic record. All manuscripts submitted to IJSL must appropriately acknowledge ideas, words, data, arguments, images, and other intellectual contributions derived from existing sources.

This policy specifically governs plagiarism, textual similarity, inappropriate text recycling, and redundant publication. Broader questions of research integrity are addressed in the journal's Publication Ethics.

1. Originality Requirement

Manuscripts submitted to IJSL must represent original scholarly work.

By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that the work has not been plagiarized, has not been published in substantially the same form elsewhere, and is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal.

Originality does not mean that every phrase or concept in a manuscript must be entirely new. Scholarly research necessarily engages with existing knowledge. However, the distinction between an author's original contribution and material derived from other sources must remain clear through appropriate citation, quotation, attribution, and academic writing practices.

2. Similarity Screening

IJSL routinely screens submitted manuscripts using [Name of Similarity-Checking Service] as part of its initial editorial assessment.

Similarity screening is intended to assist editors in identifying potentially problematic textual overlap with previously published or publicly available material. The resulting similarity report is used as an editorial screening tool and is not treated as an automatic determination of plagiarism.

Manuscripts may also be screened again during revision or before final publication when necessary.

3. No Automatic Similarity Percentage for Rejection

IJSL does not determine plagiarism solely on the basis of a fixed similarity percentage.

A similarity score indicates the amount of text that corresponds with material available in the comparison database, but it does not establish whether the overlap is legitimate or unethical.

A relatively high similarity score may result from correctly cited quotations, standardized methodological terminology, references, institutional names, technical expressions, or other legitimate textual matches. Conversely, a relatively low similarity score may still contain serious plagiarism if a central argument, distinctive interpretation, dataset, or substantial intellectual contribution has been reproduced without proper attribution.

Editors therefore evaluate similarity reports qualitatively by considering:

  • the source of the matched material;

  • the location and concentration of textual overlap;

  • whether appropriate citation or quotation has been provided;

  • the originality of the manuscript's principal argument;

  • whether distinctive ideas or expressions have been appropriated;

  • the extent of overlap with any single source;

  • whether overlap occurs in substantive sections of the manuscript; and

  • whether the similarity reflects legitimate academic convention or inappropriate reproduction.

Editorial judgment, rather than a numerical score alone, determines whether further action is required.

4. Plagiarism

For the purposes of this policy, plagiarism includes presenting another person's intellectual or creative work as one's own without appropriate acknowledgment.

Plagiarism may involve:

  • verbatim copying without quotation and citation;

  • substantial reproduction of sentences or paragraphs with only superficial modification;

  • close paraphrasing that retains the structure or distinctive expression of the original source without adequate attribution;

  • appropriation of ideas, arguments, theoretical formulations, interpretations, or conceptual frameworks without acknowledgment;

  • unauthorized use of data, tables, figures, photographs, illustrations, or other materials;

  • translation of material from another language and presentation of the translated content as original work without attribution;

  • reproduction of unpublished materials without appropriate acknowledgment or authorization; or

  • presenting another researcher's findings or intellectual contribution as one's own.

Plagiarism may occur regardless of whether the original source is published, unpublished, printed, digital, audiovisual, or available through another medium.

5. Mosaic and Patchwork Plagiarism

Combining phrases, sentences, arguments, or ideas from multiple sources without appropriate attribution is considered unacceptable even when no single source accounts for a large proportion of the manuscript.

Replacing individual words with synonyms, changing sentence order, or making minor grammatical modifications does not transform copied material into original scholarly writing.

Acceptable paraphrasing requires genuine reformulation based on the author's understanding of the source while preserving accurate attribution to the original scholarship.

6. Plagiarism of Ideas and Intellectual Contributions

Plagiarism is not limited to textual copying.

Using another scholar's distinctive hypothesis, conceptual model, analytical framework, unpublished research idea, interpretation, or other identifiable intellectual contribution without acknowledgment may constitute plagiarism even when the wording is substantially different.

This principle is particularly important for material obtained through confidential scholarly activities such as peer review, grant assessment, conference discussion, research collaboration, or access to unpublished manuscripts.

7. Self-Plagiarism and Text Recycling

Authors may legitimately build upon their previous research, but previously disseminated material must be transparently acknowledged.

Inappropriate text recycling occurs when substantial portions of an author's earlier work are reproduced without appropriate citation or disclosure in a manner that creates the misleading impression that the material is entirely new.

The journal will consider the context and function of repeated material. Limited reuse of standardized methodological descriptions or technical terminology may be acceptable when rewriting would reduce precision or clarity. However, substantial recycling of literature reviews, analyses, discussions, conclusions, or other intellectually substantive material requires appropriate citation and may be unacceptable when it creates redundant publication.

Authors should cite relevant previous publications arising from the same project, dataset, research setting, or conceptual development where necessary to clarify the relationship between the submitted manuscript and earlier work.

8. Duplicate and Redundant Publication

IJSL does not accept duplicate or substantially redundant publication.

Duplicate publication occurs when substantially the same scholarly work is published more than once without appropriate disclosure or justification.

Redundant publication may occur when multiple articles substantially reproduce the same:

  • research questions;

  • dataset;

  • participants;

  • analysis;

  • findings;

  • tables or figures; or

  • conclusions

without sufficient new scholarly contribution or transparent cross-reference.

Different publications arising from the same research project or dataset may be acceptable when they address genuinely distinct research questions, provide substantively different analyses, and transparently acknowledge related publications.

Artificially fragmenting a single coherent study into multiple minimally differentiated articles solely to increase publication output is discouraged.

9. Preprints, Theses, Dissertations, and Conference Materials

The existence of an earlier version of research in a legitimate scholarly form does not automatically constitute duplicate publication.

Material previously disseminated as a:

  • preprint;

  • thesis or dissertation;

  • institutional repository document;

  • research report;

  • conference abstract;

  • conference presentation; or

  • other clearly identified preliminary scholarly output

may be considered for publication where permitted by the journal, provided that the submitted article constitutes an appropriate journal contribution and the prior dissemination is transparently disclosed.

Authors should inform the journal of relevant prior versions at submission and cite or link to them where appropriate.

The editorial team will assess whether previous dissemination materially compromises the originality or publication status of the manuscript.

10. Quotations and Attribution

Verbatim material taken from another source must be clearly distinguished from the author's own writing and appropriately cited.

Authors should avoid excessive quotation when original synthesis and critical analysis would be more appropriate.

Citation alone does not necessarily justify extensive reproduction of copyrighted text. Authors remain responsible for complying with copyright and licensing requirements as specified in IJSL's Copyright Notice.

11. Translated Sources

Translation does not eliminate the obligation to acknowledge the original source.

Authors who translate a quotation, argument, conceptual explanation, or other material from another language must provide appropriate attribution. Translated material must not be presented as though it originated with the author.

Where an exact translation is used as a quotation, this should be clearly indicated where appropriate.

12. Reuse of Authors' Own Data, Figures, and Tables

Reuse of previously published data, figures, tables, or other substantial research material must be transparent.

Authors must:

  • cite the original publication;

  • identify whether the material is reproduced or adapted;

  • obtain permission where required; and

  • explain the relationship between the previous publication and the submitted manuscript when relevant.

Presenting previously published material as newly generated evidence without disclosure is unacceptable.

13. Similarity in Methods and Standardized Expressions

IJSL recognizes that certain areas of scholarly writing may legitimately contain textual similarities.

These may include:

  • names of research instruments;

  • established methodological terminology;

  • standard statistical procedures;

  • commonly used definitions;

  • institutional or legal terminology;

  • ethical approval statements; and

  • other expressions for which substantial linguistic variation may be impractical or undesirable.

Such similarities will be evaluated contextually and will not automatically be classified as plagiarism.

However, extensive verbatim reproduction of methodological descriptions from another publication should be appropriately cited or reformulated where possible.

14. References and Bibliographies

Reference-list similarity is not ordinarily treated as plagiarism because scholars working on related topics may appropriately cite many of the same sources.

Nevertheless, references included in a manuscript must correspond to sources genuinely relevant to and used in the study.

Copying a bibliography from another publication without consulting or appropriately integrating the cited sources is inconsistent with responsible scholarly practice.

Fabricated or unverifiable references are addressed under IJSL's Publication Ethics and, where AI-assisted tools are involved, the Generative AI Policy.

15. Use of Generative AI and Originality

The use of Generative AI does not exempt authors from originality requirements.

Authors remain responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted text does not reproduce protected or previously published material inappropriately and that all ideas, evidence, and sources requiring acknowledgment are properly cited.

Requirements concerning AI disclosure, verification, fabrication, confidentiality, and scholarly responsibility are governed by IJSL's Generative AI Policy and are therefore not repeated here.

16. Similarity Detected Before Peer Review

If potentially problematic similarity is identified during initial screening, the editor may:

  • proceed with the manuscript when the similarity is legitimate;

  • request clarification from the authors;

  • return the manuscript for correction before peer review;

  • request appropriate citation or rewriting; or

  • reject the manuscript when substantial plagiarism or redundant publication is evident.

The response will depend on the nature, extent, and scholarly significance of the overlap.

17. Similarity Detected During Peer Review

Reviewers who identify possible plagiarism or inappropriate duplication should confidentially inform the handling editor and, where possible, identify the relevant source.

Reviewers should not directly accuse or contact authors regarding suspected plagiarism.

The editorial team will evaluate the concern and determine whether additional screening, clarification, or other action is necessary.

Peer-review procedures themselves are governed by IJSL's Peer Review Process.

18. Similarity Detected After Revision

Revised manuscripts may be subject to further similarity screening, particularly when substantial new text has been added or when earlier concerns were identified.

Authors are expected to address originality concerns comprehensively rather than merely reducing the numerical similarity score.

Mechanical alteration of wording solely to circumvent similarity-detection software, without improving attribution or scholarly originality, is unacceptable.

19. Post-Publication Plagiarism

If credible evidence of plagiarism or substantial redundant publication emerges after publication, IJSL will assess the effect of the problem on the reliability and integrity of the published record.

Depending on the nature and severity of the issue, appropriate action may include clarification, correction, retraction, or another editorial notice.

The applicable procedures are governed by the journal's Retraction and Correction Policy.

20. Editorial Assessment and Author Response

When significant textual overlap is identified, authors may be asked to explain the circumstances and provide relevant supporting information.

The editorial team will consider:

  • the authors' explanation;

  • the nature of the source material;

  • whether attribution was provided;

  • whether the overlap appears intentional or inadvertent;

  • whether the duplicated material is central to the scholarly contribution; and

  • whether the integrity of the manuscript can be restored through revision.

Editorial responses will be proportionate to the seriousness of the concern.

21. Appeals

Authors who believe that a plagiarism or similarity decision resulted from a material factual or procedural error may submit an appeal in accordance with IJSL's Complaints and Appeals Policy.

An appeal should address the specific overlap identified and provide substantive evidence demonstrating why reconsideration is warranted.

22. Guiding Principle

IJSL distinguishes textual similarity from plagiarism.

Similarity is a measurable correspondence between texts. Plagiarism is an ethical and scholarly judgment concerning inappropriate appropriation or representation of another person's work.

Accordingly, IJSL does not seek merely to reduce similarity percentages. The journal seeks to ensure that every published article demonstrates genuine scholarly originality, transparent engagement with existing research, accurate attribution, and a clearly identifiable contribution to knowledge.

All manuscripts submitted to Indonesian Journal of Socio-Cultural Learning (IJSL) are subject to originality requirements and may undergo similarity screening. Similarity reports support editorial judgment but do not replace it, and no manuscript is classified as plagiarized solely on the basis of a numerical similarity score.