Plagiarism and Similarity Screening Policy

For the purposes of this policy, plagiarism includes the inappropriate use of another person's words, ideas, data, images, arguments, or other intellectual contributions without proper acknowledgment.

Plagiarism may include, but is not limited to:

  • copying text from another source without appropriate quotation and citation;
  • presenting another person's ideas, arguments, findings, data, visual materials, or other intellectual work as one's own;
  • paraphrasing another source too closely without genuinely rewriting the material in the author's own scholarly language;
  • reproducing substantial portions of previously published material without appropriate acknowledgment;
  • using previously published work of the author without appropriate citation or disclosure where such reuse creates a misleading impression of originality;
  • translating material from another source and presenting it without proper attribution;
  • using figures, images, diagrams, tables, or other materials without appropriate acknowledgment or permission where required; and
  • other forms of unattributed appropriation that compromise the originality or integrity of the manuscript.

Proper citation alone does not necessarily make extensive verbatim or near-verbatim copying acceptable. Authors are expected to synthesize and express scholarly information appropriately in their own academic writing while acknowledging the original sources.

1. Similarity Screening

Similarity screening is normally conducted during the Initial Editorial Assessment and may be repeated at a later stage before final acceptance or publication where necessary.

The similarity report is evaluated by the editorial team.

The screening considers both:

  1. the overall similarity index; and
  2. the qualitative pattern of similarity identified in the report.

The editorial assessment may consider:

  • the source of the matched material;
  • the extent and concentration of the matched text;
  • whether substantial similarity originates from one or several particular sources;
  • whether the material has been appropriately quoted, paraphrased, and cited;
  • whether the similarity occurs in substantive scholarly content;
  • whether the overlap involves previously published work by the same author;
  • whether the similarity may indicate duplicate or redundant publication; and
  • whether the pattern of overlap raises broader concerns regarding academic integrity.

2. Similarity Threshold

Jurnal Desain applies an overall similarity index below 20% as its normal technical screening threshold.

A manuscript with an overall similarity index of less than 20% may satisfy the journal's numerical similarity requirement, but this does not automatically establish that the manuscript is free from plagiarism.

A manuscript with an overall similarity index of 20% or higher does not satisfy the journal's normal technical screening threshold and requires further editorial evaluation.

The percentage itself does not determine whether plagiarism has occurred.

Accordingly:

  • a manuscript with similarity below 20% may still be subject to revision or rejection if substantive plagiarism or inappropriate textual reuse is identified; and
  • a manuscript with similarity of 20% or higher will be evaluated to determine whether the similarity results from correct scholarly use of sources, remediable writing problems, extensive text reuse, duplicate publication, or a potentially serious integrity violation.

The editorial decision is therefore based on both the numerical similarity result and the substantive examination of the similarity report.

3. Classification of Similarity Findings

Similarity findings are assessed according to their nature and seriousness.

a. Acceptable or Explainable Similarity

Similarity may be considered acceptable or explainable where the matched material does not constitute inappropriate appropriation and does not materially affect the originality of the manuscript.

Such similarity may include appropriately attributed material or unavoidable textual overlap that does not compromise scholarly integrity.

The manuscript may proceed if it otherwise satisfies the journal's editorial requirements.

b. Remediable Similarity or Inappropriate Textual Overlap

A manuscript may contain similarity that does not yet constitute a serious integrity violation but requires correction before further processing.

Examples may include:

  • excessive close paraphrasing;
  • insufficiently differentiated wording from cited sources;
  • inappropriate reuse of the author's previously published text;
  • excessive quotation;
  • incomplete attribution; or
  • an overall similarity level that exceeds the journal's technical threshold but appears capable of being corrected without altering the integrity of the research.

In such cases, the manuscript may be returned for revision.

c. Serious Suspected Plagiarism or Academic Integrity Violation

A finding may be classified as serious where the similarity report and manuscript provide substantial indications of plagiarism or deliberate inappropriate reuse.

Examples may include:

  • substantial unattributed copying;
  • extensive copying from one or more identifiable sources;
  • appropriation of another author's ideas, findings, data, or visual materials;
  • deliberate concealment of copied material through superficial paraphrasing;
  • substantial duplicate or redundant publication;
  • extensive undisclosed reuse of previously published work; or
  • a pattern of textual appropriation that materially compromises the originality and reliability of the manuscript.

Such cases may result in rejection and may be handled under the journal's Publication Ethics and research-misconduct procedures.

4. Editorial Actions Before Publication

Based on the similarity report and editorial assessment, Jurnal Desain may take one or more of the following actions:

Proceed

The manuscript may continue to the next editorial stage where the similarity findings are acceptable and no material integrity concerns are identified.

Revision

The manuscript may be returned to the author where the problem is considered correctable.

Authors may be required to:

  • rewrite improperly paraphrased passages;
  • reduce unnecessary textual overlap;
  • provide appropriate citations or quotations;
  • clarify reuse of previously published material;
  • correct attribution of figures, tables, images, or other materials; and
  • resubmit the revised manuscript for further similarity screening.

Submission of a revised manuscript does not automatically mean that the similarity issue has been resolved. The revised version may be screened again.

Reject Submission

The manuscript may be rejected where the editorial assessment identifies plagiarism, substantial inappropriate text reuse, duplicate publication, or another serious academic-integrity concern that cannot appropriately be resolved through normal revision.

Where necessary, the matter may be handled under the journal's Publication Ethics procedures.

5. Similarity Screening and Peer Review

Similarity screening is primarily an editorial responsibility and forms part of the journal's editorial assessment and integrity-control procedures.

The similarity percentage does not replace scholarly peer review, and peer reviewers are not expected to determine manuscript quality solely from a similarity score.

Where a potential integrity concern is identified during the editorial or peer-review process, the matter should be referred to the responsible Editor for further assessment.

Allegations of plagiarism should not be made solely on the basis of a numerical similarity percentage without examination of the underlying evidence.

6. Previously Published Work and Author Text Reuse

Authors must appropriately cite and disclose relevant previously published work, including their own work.

Reuse of an author's previously published text, data, images, findings, or other material must not create a misleading impression that previously disseminated material is entirely new.

Where a manuscript substantially overlaps with the author's earlier publication, the author must clearly identify the previous work and explain the relationship between the publications where necessary.

Substantial redundant or duplicate publication may constitute a publication-ethics violation even where the overlapping material originates from the same author.

7. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring that:

  • the submitted manuscript is original;
  • all sources are appropriately acknowledged;
  • direct quotations are clearly identified;
  • paraphrased material is genuinely rewritten and properly cited;
  • all figures, images, tables, data, and other third-party materials are appropriately attributed;
  • previously published work by the authors is appropriately cited and disclosed;
  • the manuscript is not simultaneously submitted to another journal; and
  • the manuscript does not contain plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or other academic-integrity violations.

Authors remain responsible for the integrity of the manuscript regardless of the result of automated similarity screening.

8. Post-Publication Plagiarism

Similarity or plagiarism concerns may also arise after publication.

If credible concerns are raised concerning a published article, Jurnal Desain will assess the matter under its Publication Ethics and post-publication procedures.

Depending on the evidence and seriousness of the case, appropriate action may include:

  • clarification;
  • correction;
  • expression of concern;
  • retraction; or
  • other corrective action consistent with the journal's publication-ethics policies.

A published article will not be removed solely to conceal an integrity problem. Where retraction is required, the publication record and retraction notice will be maintained transparently in accordance with the journal's applicable policy.

9. Academic Integrity and Editorial Judgment

Jurnal Desain does not determine plagiarism solely from automated software or a fixed numerical score.

Similarity-detection software assists the editorial team in identifying material requiring examination, while the final interpretation remains an editorial responsibility based on the available evidence.

The journal may request clarification, source documents, previous publications, or other supporting information where necessary to determine the nature of a similarity finding.

Any allegation or determination of plagiarism will be handled carefully, fairly, and on the basis of documented evidence in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics policy.