A. Purpose

The purpose of the Scholarly Misconduct policy is to provide guidelines for investigating and adjudicating claims of plagiarism and other scholarly misconduct. This policy embodies the principle that every effort should be made to resolve disputes without resort to formal investigation. Moreover, it is not reasonable to assume that all researchers are informed, or even agree, as to what constitutes acceptable professional practice. Even experienced scholars are sometimes in dispute over what constitutes ethical behavior. Thus, while sanctions may be appropriate in some cases, counseling and training may be appropriate in others.

Misconduct occurs in varying degrees of severity and in many different forms. Each case of alleged member misconduct is expected to have unique aspects and it is impossible to provide a “one size fits all” procedure. This policy is perhaps most suitable for cases where documentary evidence can be obtained to establish authorship or other misconduct with a high degree of certainty. In general, the process should keep all parties informed and allow a respondent to take responsibility before a more serious step in the process occurs. The process should be adapted to fit each individual case while preserving the important principles of the policy.

In general, IARSA members are expected to comply with the IARSA Code of Research Conduct which provides a basis for ethical scholarly practice. The IARSA Publications and Research Committee regards the Code of Research Conduct not merely as a set of narrow rules upon which complaints of scholarly misconduct may be based, but rather as a source of guidance for the scholarly community.

Editors of non- IARSA publications are free to adopt in whole or in part the IARSA Code of Research Conduct and the procedures described in this policy. However these processes, guidelines, or such “rules” as they may imply, are not intended to apply to, or otherwise inappropriately interfere with, non- IARSA publications.

“Scholarly misconduct” is the term we use to describe behaviors by researchers that contravene the IARSA Code of Research Conduct. While plagiarism is the form of scholarly misconduct that receives the most attention, there are other forms of scholarly misconduct, such as the fabrication or falsification of data, research procedures or data analysis, or the exercise of power or bias in scholarly activities.

“Plagiarism” is: a. the use of another person’s writings, information, ideas, concepts or data without that person’s permission; b. misrepresentation to an editor or conference program chair about the originality of the submitted work (often called “self-plagiarism”).