Journal: Jurnal Agrium (Journal of Agricultural Research)
Last updated: 25 October 2025
Contact: agrium@unimal.ac.id

1. Purpose and Scope

Jurnal Agrium is committed to safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record. This policy explains how the Journal detects, evaluates, and addresses plagiarism, text recycling, and related misconduct in all submissions, including research articles, reviews, short communications, and supplementary materials.

2. Definitions

• Plagiarism: Presenting another person’s ideas, processes, results, words, figures, or tables as one’s own without appropriate attribution.
• Self-plagiarism / Text recycling: Reusing one’s own previously published text or data without citation, transparency, or permission when required.
• Redundant/duplicate publication: Publishing substantially similar content in more than one venue without proper cross-reference and justification.
• Inappropriate paraphrasing: Close paraphrasing that mirrors the structure or wording of the source while giving the impression of original expression.

3. Screening Tools and Coverage

The Journal screens submissions using reputable similarity-detection services (e.g., iThenticate via Crossref Similarity Check or equivalent). Databases searched typically include published journals, books, conference proceedings, preprint servers, and publicly available web content. The particular service used may change as technology and coverage evolve.

4. Screening Workflow

• Initial submission: All manuscripts pass an editorial screening and a similarity check before peer review. Submissions with concerning overlap may be returned to authors for explanation or revision, or may be rejected.
• Revision: Revised manuscripts may be re-checked to confirm proper resolution of overlap.
• Pre-acceptance / production: The accepted version may be checked again if concerns persist (e.g., added text, new figures).
• Post-publication: If credible concerns arise after publication, the Journal investigates and may issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction in line with our Correction & Retraction Policy.

5. Similarity Thresholds and Editorial Triggers

Similarity percentages are diagnostic indicators and not automatic decisions. Editors consider context, discipline norms, and location of overlap.

Measure (after exclusions)	Typical Editorial Action
Total similarity ≤ 15%	Generally acceptable if sources are cited and no single-source block is excessive.
Total similarity 16–25%	Editorial review; authors may be asked to revise paraphrasing, add citations, or rewrite overlapping passages.
Total similarity > 25%	Likely major concern; may lead to rejection or return for substantial revision with justification.
Any single source > 5–10%	Investigate for potential close copying or patchwriting; require rewriting and correct citation, or reject if severe.

Note: Thresholds are guidance values; editors may deviate with documented rationale (e.g., methodological boilerplate).

6. What We Exclude from Similarity Counts

To avoid false positives, similarity reports are interpreted after excluding references, bibliographies, acknowledgements, author names/affiliations, standard methodological phrases, mathematical expressions, and short matches (e.g., < 8 consecutive words). Long verbatim text, even if “common,” is reviewed for appropriate quotation and citation.

7. Handling Suspected Plagiarism

1. Preliminary assessment: The editor reviews the report, identifies problematic regions, and documents findings.
2. Author notification: The corresponding author is asked to explain overlaps and provide revisions or original sources/files where relevant.
3. Editorial decision: Outcomes include proceed without change, request minor/major revision, or reject. If misconduct is suspected, the Journal may contact institutions or funders and follow research-integrity procedures.
4. Post-publication cases: The Journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction, and will update indexing metadata accordingly.

8. Text Recycling, Self-Plagiarism, and Preprints

• Permissible reuse: Limited reuse of Methods text may be acceptable for reproducibility, but should be paraphrased where practical and must cite the prior work.
• Author’s own figures/tables/data: Reuse requires clear labeling and citation of the original source and license; prior publisher permissions may be needed.
• Preprints: Posting on recognized preprint servers is not considered prior publication. Cite the preprint in the submission; overlap with the author’s preprint will be interpreted accordingly.

9. Figures, Images, Tables, and Data

Image and data integrity are part of plagiarism screening. Manipulation, duplication (e.g., re-use of panels or gels), or uncredited reproduction from third-party sources is prohibited. Editors may request original, unprocessed images and raw data. Reproduced materials must carry an explicit credit line and license information; where the original license is not compatible, written permission is required.

10. Author Education and Good Practice

• Quote sparingly and use quotation marks for verbatim text; always include a citation and page/line where appropriate.
• Paraphrase substantially in your own words and structure; do not rely on close paraphrase or patchwriting.
• Cite the original source of ideas, data, and figures, including your own prior publications.
• Maintain accurate notes of sources and keep versioned drafts and raw data for verification.

11. Record-Keeping and Transparency

The Journal retains similarity reports, correspondence, and decisions in the editorial management system in accordance with our retention schedule. Where ethical actions are taken, the public record (e.g., correction or retraction notice) will state the reason clearly.