ALLEGATIONS OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

1. Policy Statement

Law and Economics is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity, academic honesty, transparency, and ethical scholarly publishing. The journal takes allegations of research misconduct seriously and is committed to handling all concerns fairly, confidentially, objectively, and in a timely manner.

Research misconduct may undermine the reliability of scholarly findings, damage public trust in academic research, and compromise the integrity of the scientific record. Accordingly, the journal establishes procedures for receiving, assessing, investigating, and responding to allegations of research misconduct involving submitted manuscripts, manuscripts under review, and published articles.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and other individuals involved in the journal's editorial and publication processes.

2. Definition of Research Misconduct

For the purposes of this policy, research misconduct refers to conduct that violates accepted standards of research integrity or publication ethics.

Research misconduct may include, but is not limited to, the following:

2.1. Fabrication of Data

Fabrication involves making up data, research results, observations, interviews, sources, or other research materials and presenting them as genuine.

2.2. Falsification of Data

Falsification involves manipulating research materials, processes, data, analyses, or findings in ways that distort the research record or misrepresent the results.

2.3. Plagiarism

Plagiarism involves using another person's words, ideas, arguments, data, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment or attribution.

This includes unattributed copying, inappropriate paraphrasing, and the unauthorized use of scholarly materials.

2.4. Duplicate or Redundant Publication

Duplicate or redundant publication occurs when substantially overlapping research findings are published or submitted for publication without adequate disclosure, justification, or acknowledgment.

Submitting substantially the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals without authorization is also prohibited.

2.5. Authorship Misconduct

Authorship misconduct includes:

Gift, guest, or honorary authorship without qualifying scholarly contributions.
Ghost authorship involving the omission of individuals who made qualifying contributions.
Misrepresentation of individual author contributions.
Adding, removing, or changing authors without appropriate justification and the agreement of affected authors.
Misrepresenting an individual's identity, affiliation, or contribution to the research.

2.6. Citation Manipulation

Citation manipulation includes the intentional inclusion of irrelevant references, coercive citation practices, or coordinated citation arrangements intended primarily to inflate citation counts or improperly influence citation metrics.

2.7. Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest

Failure to disclose financial, professional, institutional, personal, or other relevant interests that could improperly influence research, peer review, or editorial decisions may constitute a breach of publication ethics.

2.8. Ethical Violations in Research Involving Human Participants

Potential misconduct may include conducting research involving human participants without required ethical approval, consent, or other applicable safeguards, or misrepresenting compliance with relevant ethical requirements.

The journal recognizes that the specific requirements depend on the nature of the research, the applicable regulations, and the relevant institutional policies.

2.9. Misuse of Artificial Intelligence

Misconduct involving artificial intelligence (AI) may include fabricating data or references, presenting generated material as verified evidence, concealing AI use when disclosure is required, or using AI tools to facilitate plagiarism, falsification, or other forms of research misconduct.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their submissions, including material produced or assisted by AI tools.

2.10. Other Forms of Research or Publication Misconduct

Other concerns may include copyright infringement, manipulation of peer review, fraudulent ethical approval documentation, suppression or selective reporting of findings, unauthorized use of confidential information, and deliberate misrepresentation of research methods or results.

Honest errors, reasonable differences in scholarly interpretation, and good-faith methodological disagreements do not, by themselves, constitute research misconduct. Such matters must be evaluated according to their nature and circumstances.

3. Submission of Allegations

Any individual who has a reasonable basis to suspect research misconduct involving a manuscript or article published in Law and Economics may report the concern to the editorial office.

Reports may be submitted by authors, reviewers, editors, researchers, readers, institutions, or other concerned parties.

To facilitate an appropriate assessment, reports should include, where available:

The title of the manuscript or published article.
The names of the authors concerned.
A clear description of the suspected misconduct.
Supporting evidence, such as relevant publications, data discrepancies, documents, or comparison materials.
An explanation of how the evidence relates to the alleged violation.
Contact information for follow-up, if the reporting party is willing to provide it.

Reports should be made in good faith and provide sufficient information to permit an initial assessment.

The journal may consider anonymous reports when they contain specific, credible, and verifiable information. The absence of a reporter's identity will not automatically invalidate a report.

Allegations should be submitted through the journal's official editorial contact channels. The journal should provide an accessible contact method on its website for research integrity concerns.

4. Initial Assessment of Allegations

Upon receiving an allegation, the editorial team will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the journal's responsibilities and whether sufficient information is available to justify further examination.

The initial assessment may consider:

The specificity and credibility of the allegation.
The relevance and reliability of the supporting evidence.
The nature and seriousness of the suspected misconduct.
Whether the concern relates to a submitted manuscript, peer-review process, or published article.
Whether clarification or additional information is required.

The journal may request further documentation from the reporting party or other relevant sources where appropriate.

If the allegation does not provide a reasonable basis for further action, the journal may close the matter while retaining an appropriate record of the assessment.

If the concern warrants further examination, the journal will proceed in accordance with the procedures outlined below.

5. Investigation Procedure

The journal will handle allegations through a proportionate and impartial process.

5.1. Preliminary Inquiry

The editorial team may conduct a preliminary inquiry to review the available evidence, identify the nature of the concern, and determine whether further investigation is warranted.

This may include examining similarity reports, source publications, research data, author contribution statements, ethics approval documentation, peer-review records, or other relevant materials.

5.2. Request for Explanation

Where appropriate, the journal will contact the corresponding author or relevant individuals and provide an opportunity to respond to the concern.

The individuals concerned may be asked to provide explanations, supporting evidence, original data, research documentation, or other materials relevant to the assessment.

Requests will be framed objectively and will avoid treating an allegation as an established finding before the evidence has been evaluated.

5.3. Further Investigation

If the concern cannot be resolved through preliminary assessment, the journal may undertake further examination and, where appropriate, consult independent experts or the relevant research institution.

The journal may request assistance from an author's institution, research ethics committee, funding body, publisher, or other competent authority when the matter falls outside the journal's investigative authority.

The journal recognizes that formal investigations into institutional research misconduct are generally best conducted by the relevant institution or other competent body.

5.4. Editorial Decision

Following the assessment, the editorial team will determine the appropriate editorial response based on the available evidence, the seriousness of the concern, and the applicable publication ethics standards.

Where necessary, the journal may defer a final editorial decision until relevant evidence or institutional findings become available.

6. Confidentiality and Protection of Parties

Law and Economics will handle allegations as confidentially as reasonably possible, subject to the requirements of a fair investigation, applicable law, and the need to consult relevant authorities.

Information about an allegation will be shared only with individuals who reasonably need access to assess or resolve the matter.

The journal will seek to protect the confidentiality of the reporting party, the individuals named in the allegation, reviewers, and other participants in the process.

The journal does not tolerate intimidation, harassment, retaliation, or other inappropriate conduct against individuals who raise concerns in good faith or participate honestly in an investigation.

At the same time, knowingly submitting false allegations or deliberately providing fabricated evidence may itself constitute misconduct and may be addressed appropriately.

7. Possible Editorial Actions

Depending on the findings and circumstances, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

7.1. For Manuscripts Under Review

Request clarification or additional evidence.
Require revisions to address correctable ethical or reporting deficiencies.
Suspend the review process while the allegation is investigated.
Reject the manuscript if serious misconduct is established or the concerns cannot be adequately resolved.
Refer the matter to an appropriate institution or authority when warranted.

7.2. For Accepted Manuscripts

Suspend production or publication pending further assessment.
Request corrections or additional documentation.
Withdraw acceptance if serious ethical violations are established.
Refer the matter to the relevant institution or authority when appropriate.

7.3. For Published Articles

Where concerns are substantiated, the journal may:

Publish a correction when the scholarly record requires amendment.
Publish an expression of concern when significant questions remain unresolved.
Retract the article when the findings justify retraction under applicable publication ethics standards.
Notify the relevant institution, publisher, or other competent authority when appropriate.
Take additional measures necessary to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

Editorial actions will be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the findings. Retraction will not be used automatically for every error or allegation; the decision will depend on the evidence and the extent to which the reliability or integrity of the published work has been compromised.

8. Expressions of Concern and Retractions

If credible concerns arise about a published article but the investigation is incomplete or a definitive conclusion cannot yet be reached, the journal may issue an expression of concern to inform readers of the unresolved issue.

If the journal determines that an article contains findings that are unreliable due to misconduct, serious error, or other grounds recognized by applicable publication ethics standards, it may retract the article.

Retraction notices should clearly identify the affected publication and explain the reasons for the action to the extent permitted by confidentiality obligations and applicable law.

The journal will seek to maintain the integrity of the publication record by linking corrections, expressions of concern, or retraction notices to the relevant article wherever technically possible.

9. Responsibilities of Authors, Reviewers, and Editors

9.1. Authors

Authors must:

Ensure that their research and manuscripts comply with accepted standards of research integrity.
Maintain accurate research records and provide supporting information when reasonably requested.
Respond honestly and promptly to editorial inquiries.
Disclose relevant conflicts of interest and applicable ethical approvals.
Cooperate with legitimate investigations concerning their work.
Correct errors or address substantiated concerns in accordance with editorial instructions.

9.2. Reviewers

Reviewers must:

Evaluate manuscripts objectively and confidentially.
Report credible concerns about plagiarism, fabricated data, falsified results, or other potential misconduct.
Avoid making unsupported allegations or presenting suspicions as established facts.
Disclose conflicts of interest that could compromise their impartiality.
Refrain from using confidential manuscript information for personal or professional advantage.

9.3. Editors

Editors must:

Assess allegations impartially and consistently.
Maintain appropriate confidentiality.
Avoid conflicts of interest in handling allegations.
Provide relevant parties with a reasonable opportunity to respond when appropriate.
Document significant decisions and the reasons supporting them.
Consult independent experts or relevant institutions when necessary.
Take appropriate action to correct or protect the scholarly record.

10. Appeals and Requests for Reconsideration

Individuals directly affected by an editorial decision arising from an allegation may submit a reasoned request for reconsideration to the editorial office.

The request should identify the decision being challenged, explain the grounds for reconsideration, and provide relevant additional evidence or clarification.

The journal may arrange an independent review of the decision where appropriate, particularly when a conflict of interest or a procedural concern has been identified.

An appeal does not automatically suspend an editorial action, although the journal may reconsider or modify an action if new evidence warrants doing so.

11. Good-Faith Reporting and Fair Treatment

Law and Economics recognizes the importance of good-faith reporting in protecting research integrity.

Individuals who raise concerns are not required to prove misconduct conclusively before reporting a reasonable suspicion. However, allegations should be based on identifiable facts or credible evidence rather than personal disputes, speculation, or attempts to improperly influence editorial decisions.

The journal will seek to distinguish genuine concerns about research integrity from authorship disagreements, methodological disputes, competing interpretations, or other matters that may require different procedures.

All allegations will be assessed according to their merits, without discrimination or inappropriate influence from an individual's academic rank, institutional position, professional reputation, or personal relationships.

12. Record Keeping and Policy Review

The journal will maintain appropriate records of allegations, supporting evidence, correspondence, assessments, and editorial decisions, subject to applicable confidentiality, privacy, and record-retention requirements.

Access to these records will be restricted to authorized individuals with a legitimate need to review the matter.

This policy may be revised periodically to reflect developments in publication ethics, research integrity standards, applicable regulations, and editorial best practices.

13. Commitment to Research Integrity

Law and Economics is committed to protecting the credibility of scholarly publishing through fair procedures, responsible editorial oversight, and appropriate responses to suspected research misconduct.

The journal encourages authors, reviewers, editors, institutions, and readers to contribute to a research environment in which scholarly claims are supported by reliable evidence, sources are properly acknowledged, and concerns about research integrity are addressed transparently and responsibly.

All parties involved in the publication process are expected to cooperate in good faith to uphold these principles and preserve the integrity of the academic record.