Our Policies
Publication Ethics AI in Research Article Processing Charges Peer Review Process Open Submission Open Access & Licensing Archiving & Management Corrections & Retractions Appeals & Complaints Conflict of Interest Plagiarism Editorial Research Integrity Copyright & LicensingQuick Links
Author Guidelines Submit Manuscript Submission QuestionsPlagiarism and Similarity Check Policy
Maintaining Academic Integrity and Originality
SOLAV Journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and originality.
This policy outlines how the Journal defines, detects, prevents, and responds to plagiarism and related forms of academic misconduct, following COPE guidelines.
All submitted manuscripts undergo comprehensive similarity screening, and violations are addressed through fair, transparent procedures.
Comprehensive Screening
- All manuscripts screened with plagiarism detection software
- Manual editorial assessment of similarity reports
- Contextual evaluation of all matches
- No automatic rejection based on percentage alone
Plagiarism Defined
- Presenting others' work as one's own
- Inadequate citation or attribution
- Self-plagiarism and redundant publication
- Unauthorized use of data or images
- Translation plagiarism
Self-Plagiarism Rules
- No duplicate submission to multiple journals
- Disclosure of preprints required
- Limited reuse of own published work
- Clear citation of previous publications
- Justification for overlapping content
Consequences
Plagiarism violations may result in manuscript rejection, article retraction, notification to institutions, and submission restrictions. All cases follow COPE procedures with opportunity for author response.
Context Matters
Similarity percentage alone does not determine misconduct. Editors evaluate the nature, source, and context of all matches. Properly cited material, methodological sections, and references are expected. Focus is on substantive, unattributed copying.
Types of Plagiarism
Plagiarism takes many forms; understanding these helps maintain academic integrity.
Direct Plagiarism
Verbatim copying of text without quotation marks or citation. The most severe form of plagiarism with clear ethical violation.
Paraphrasing Plagiarism
Restating others' ideas in different words without proper attribution. Changing words while keeping original structure and ideas.
Self-Plagiarism
Reusing one's own previously published work without disclosure or justification. Also called redundant or duplicate publication.
Visual Plagiarism
Unauthorized use of figures, tables, graphs, or images without permission or attribution. Includes data and graphical elements.
Translation Plagiarism
Translating others' work without attribution. Language translation does not create original work; source must be cited.
Mosaic Plagiarism
Mixing copied phrases with original text without proper citation. "Patchwriting" that blends sources without clear attribution.
Detection and Assessment
Plagiarism screening occurs during initial editorial assessment before single-blind peer review assignment, ensuring reviewers evaluate only original work.
All submitted manuscripts undergo comprehensive similarity screening through multiple detection methods:
Screening Methods:
- Software Detection: Using industry-standard plagiarism detection tools
- Database Comparison: Against published literature, web content, and academic databases
- Cross-Reference Check: Verification of citations and references
- Image Analysis: Examination of figures and tables for originality
- Editorial Assessment: Manual review by experienced editors
- Expert Review: Subject-specific evaluation during peer review
- Source Verification: Checking cited sources for proper attribution
- Historical Check: Comparison with authors' previous publications
Editorial Evaluation Criteria:
Similarity reports are evaluated based on:
- Nature of Overlap: Is it substantive content or boilerplate text?
- Source Identification: Is the source properly cited?
- Academic Context: Is this common methodology or unique content?
- Citation Presence: Are all borrowed ideas properly attributed?
- Author Intent: Is this likely accidental or deliberate?
- Pattern Analysis: Isolated incident or systematic issue?
Important Note
A similarity percentage alone does not determine misconduct. A manuscript with 30% similarity from properly cited quotations and references is acceptable, while a manuscript with 5% similarity containing unattributed substantive copying is not. Context and quality of attribution matter more than percentage.
Acceptable Similarity
- Properly Cited Quotations: Text within quotation marks with complete citation
- Standard Methodologies: Common experimental procedures and descriptions
- Reference Sections: Bibliographic entries and citation lists
- Technical Terminology: Standard field-specific language and definitions
- Common Knowledge: Widely accepted facts not requiring citation
- Mathematical Formulas: Standard equations and calculations
- Author's Previous Work: With proper citation and disclosure
Unacceptable Similarity
- Direct Copying: Verbatim text without quotation marks or citation
- Paraphrased Content: Restated ideas without attribution
- Duplicate Submission: Same manuscript submitted elsewhere
- Salami Publication: Dividing one study into multiple papers
- Copyright Violation: Using copyrighted material without permission
- Undisclosed Reuse: Recycling own published work without citation
- Fabricated Citations: Citing sources that don't support claims
Threshold Guidelines:
While each case is evaluated individually, these general guidelines apply:
- 0-15% similarity: Generally acceptable with proper attribution
- 15-25% similarity: Requires editorial review and author explanation
- 25-40% similarity: High risk; likely requires revision or rejection
- 40%+ similarity: Very high risk; typically results in rejection
Note: These are guidelines only. A manuscript with 10% unattributed substantive copying may be rejected, while a manuscript with 30% properly cited material may be accepted.
Self-plagiarism involves reusing one's own previously published work without proper disclosure. This compromises scholarly integrity by presenting old work as new.
Key Principles:
- Disclosure Requirement: Authors must disclose all related previous publications
- Citation Mandatory: Any reused content must be clearly cited
- Justification Needed: Reuse must be justified (e.g., methodological description)
- Substantial New Contribution: Manuscript must contain significant new content
- No Duplicate Submission: Manuscript cannot be under review elsewhere
Permitted Reuse (with conditions):
- Methodological Descriptions: Standard lab protocols or analysis methods
- Literature Reviews: When building upon previous review work
- Conference Papers: Expanded versions with substantial new content
- Thesis/Dissertation: Adapted portions with significant modification
- Technical Reports: When converting to scholarly article format
Prohibited Practices:
- Duplicate Publication: Publishing same results in multiple journals
- Salami Slicing: Dividing one study into least publishable units
- Text Recycling: Copying extensive text from previous publications
- Data Repackaging: Presenting same data with minor reanalysis
- Translation Recycling: Publishing same work in different languages
Preprint Policy
Preprints must be disclosed at submission. Manuscripts previously posted on preprint servers are generally acceptable, but must not be under consideration elsewhere. Final published versions supersede preprint versions.
Manipulation of images, graphs, or data to misrepresent results constitutes serious academic misconduct.
Prohibited Image Manipulations:
- Selective Enhancement: Enhancing specific regions to emphasize results
- Data Deletion: Removing or cropping out contradictory data
- Cloning/Compositing: Combining images to create false results
- Background Alteration: Changing backgrounds to hide artifacts
- Unauthorized Reuse: Using others' images without permission
- Resolution Manipulation: Altering resolution to obscure details
- Color Adjustment: Changing colors to exaggerate differences
- Label Manipulation: Altering axis labels or scale markers
Data Integrity Requirements:
- Raw Data Availability: Authors must retain original data for 5 years
- Verification Access: Data may be requested during review
- Statistical Accuracy: No selective reporting or p-hacking
- Methodological Transparency: Clear description of data processing
- Reproducibility: Methods should allow replication
Permitted Adjustments:
The following adjustments are acceptable if disclosed:
- Brightness/Contrast: Applied uniformly across entire image
- Cropping: To remove irrelevant areas
- Color Conversion: Grayscale conversion for publication
- Size Adjustment: For formatting requirements
- Annotation: Adding labels, arrows, or scale bars
Serious Misconduct
Image or data fabrication is considered among the most serious forms of research misconduct. Such violations typically result in immediate rejection, article retraction, institutional notification, and potential submission bans.
Editorial Actions and Consequences
All plagiarism investigations are conducted independently by the editorial board. The publisher (Leothar Company) has no influence over investigation outcomes or sanctions.
When plagiarism or excessive similarity is identified, SOLAV Journal follows COPE procedures to ensure fair and consistent handling.
Investigation Process
- Initial Identification: Similarity software detection or reviewer/editor identification
- Preliminary Assessment: Editorial evaluation of match context and severity
- Author Notification: Authors informed and given opportunity to respond (14 business days)
- Evidence Review: Examination of all available evidence and author response
- Expert Consultation: When needed, independent expert assessment
- Decision Making: Final decision by Editor-in-Chief following COPE guidelines
- Implementation: Appropriate action based on findings
- Documentation: Records maintained for future reference
Possible Actions by Severity
- Minor/Accidental: Request for revision and proper citation
- Moderate/Unattributed: Mandatory revision with editorial oversight
- Major/Deliberate: Manuscript rejection with explanation
- Severe/Systematic: Rejection, institutional notification, submission restrictions
- Published Article: Correction, expression of concern, or retraction
Consequences for Violations:
| Violation Type | Typical Action | Additional Measures |
|---|---|---|
| Minor citation errors | Correction request | Educational resources |
| Unattributed paraphrasing | Revision required | Editorial oversight of rewrite |
| Direct copying | Manuscript rejection | Warning notice |
| Self-plagiarism | Rejection or retraction | Institutional notification |
| Data/image fabrication | Immediate retraction | COPE registration, funding agency notification |
| Systematic plagiarism | Submission ban (1-5 years) | Public notice, all institutions notified |
Author Rights and Appeals
Authors have the right to respond to plagiarism allegations and appeal decisions. All investigations are conducted confidentially and fairly. Appeals follow the Journal's Appeals and Complaints Policy. Good faith errors are distinguished from deliberate misconduct.
Prevention and Education
Resources for Authors
- Author Guidelines: Comprehensive submission requirements
- Citation Tutorials: Proper citation methods and styles
- Similarity Tools: Recommendations for pre-submission checks
- Template Examples: Model manuscripts with proper formatting
- FAQs: Common questions about attribution and originality
- Workshops: Periodic online training sessions
Best Practices
- Verify Before Submission: Use plagiarism check tools before submission
- Cite Everything: When in doubt, provide citation
- Use Quotation Marks: For direct quotes with page numbers
- Disclose Everything: Previous publications, preprints, related work
- Keep Records: Maintain research notes and source materials
- Seek Guidance: Contact editors with attribution questions
Educational Approach
SOLAV Journal emphasizes education and prevention alongside detection. We distinguish between accidental errors and deliberate misconduct, providing guidance for improvement. Our goal is to maintain academic integrity while supporting authors in producing high-quality, original research.
Related Policies & Resources
For complete details on ethical standards and procedures, consult our related policy pages:
Questions About Plagiarism?
Contact our Ethics Committee for clarification on originality requirements or to report concerns.
[email protected]Check Before Submission
We recommend verifying originality before submission to avoid delays.
View Guidelines
