1. Policy Declaration and Compliance
The Physical Therapy Journal of Indonesia (PTJI) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication integrity and research. The methods for addressing claims of research and publication misconduct pertaining to submitted or published publications are described in this policy. Every process complies with the fundamental flowcharts and best practices that the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) recommends.

2. Misconduct Definition
Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in the planning, execution, evaluation, or reporting of research is referred to as research and publishing misconduct. The PTJI Editorial Board retains the power to look into additional significant violations of professional behavior; this is by no means all-inclusive.
2.1. Fabrication and Fabrication
- Fabrication is the act of recording or reporting fictitious data or results.
- Falsification is the manipulation of research materials, tools, or procedures, as well as the alteration or omission of data or findings so that the research is not appropriately documented in the research record.
2.2. Plagiarism
- Plagiarism is the use of another person's words, ideas, methods, or outcomes without giving due credit. This includes self-plagiarism, which is the practice of reusing significant portions of one's own published work without giving due credit to the original author.
2.3. Data and Image Manipulation
- Image manipulation is the process of altering or improving images (such as Western blots, photos, or micrographs) in a way that obscures, shifts, or distorts the original scientific data. Adjustments (such as brightness and contrast) that are acceptable must be made uniformly throughout the image and not be misleading.
- Data manipulation, which is frequently associated with falsification, is the deliberate removal or modification of data points to reach a particular conclusion.
2.4. Additional Ethical Violations
- Authorship misconduct includes disputing the authorship of someone who satisfies the PTJI's authorship requirements, as well as unjustified inclusion (Guest Authorship) or unjustifiable exclusion (Ghost Authorship).
- Unreported Conflict of Interest (COI): Failure to declare any personal, professional, or financial interests that might affect the study or the editing process (as specified in the PTJI COI Policy).
- Submitting the same material to several journals at once or republishing significant portions of one's own work without proper citation and disclosure are examples of duplicate or redundant publication.

3. Allegation Reporting and Prioritization
An accusation of misbehavior may be made by any person, including readers, reviewers, editors, and employees.
3.1. Reporting Process
The PTJI Editor-in-Chief must receive written allegations at editorptji@gmail.com, the official editorial email address.
- The name, contact details, and institutional affiliation of the person making the claim must be included in the report (anonymity will be safeguarded during the investigation).
- A thorough explanation of the alleged misbehavior and where it appears in the manuscript or published article.
- Every piece of evidence that can be found to support the accusation (e.g., source documents, precise textual comparisons).
3.2. First Triage
The report will be examined by the Editor-in-Chief (EiC). The accusation may be rejected if it is insignificant, unsupported, or outside the purview of wrongdoing. The EiC will launch a formal investigation if the accusation is shown to be true and significant.

4. Official Investigation Process
The inquiry procedure shall be prompt, impartial, and private. In cases of confirmed or highly suspected wrongdoing, PTJI promotes engagement with authors' institutions in accordance with COPE guidelines.
4.1. Committee for Investigation
An Ad-hoc Misconduct Investigation Committee (AMIC), usually made up of senior members of the Editorial Board and possibly outside subject area experts who have no conflict of interest with the parties concerned, will be established by the EiC.
4.2. Phases of the Investigation
1. Fact-finding The AMIC will examine every piece of evidence and may consult a third-party expert (forensic image analysis, for example).
2. Institutional Referral (Crucial Step): The EiC will formally get in touch with the relevant Institutional Research Integrity Officer or Head of Department for the accused author or authors if the AMIC finds substantial preliminary evidence of serious misconduct. The journal will supply the proof and ask the organization to start an official inquiry. Since institutions are normally better able to obtain original data and interview persons, the PTJI will usually halt its internal probe until the institutional inquiry's conclusion.
3. Notifying the Author: The accusation and the referral to their institution will be properly communicated to the appropriate author (or accused party). They will have a set amount of time (usually 30 calendar days) to give the AMIC and/or their institution a thorough and meaningful answer.
4. Determination: The AMIC will decide whether misbehavior has taken place, how serious it is, and who is accountable based on the evidence, the author's response, and the results of the institutional inquiry.

5. Sanctions and Actions
According to the AMIC and the EiC, PTJI will impose punishments that are commensurate with the seriousness of the infraction.
5.1. Reactions to Manuscripts Submitted (Prior to Publication)
In the event that peer review confirms misconduct:
- Rejection: The manuscript is rejected immediately and permanently.
- Notification: The institutional heads of each author are formally informed of the misconduct findings.
- Embargo a five-year prohibition on future submissions by the corresponding author and co-authors.
5.2. Reactions to Articles That Have Been Published
The following measures could be implemented if wrongdoing is verified after publication:
- Correction: If the error is small and does not affect the validity of the main conclusions, a formal Correction Notice will be issued.
- Expression of Concern: If there are significant doubts regarding the work's integrity but the institutional investigation is still ongoing, an Expression of Concern should be issued.
- Retraction: If there is serious misbehavior (such as fabrication, falsification, or significant plagiarism) and the results are untrustworthy, a formal Notice of Retraction is issued (the article stays in the database but is watermarked as Retracted, and the retraction notice is published).
5.3. Notification of Institutions
In keeping with our commitment to cooperative research integrity oversight, the EiC will notify funding bodies and the authors' and/or reviewers' institutions (Heads of Department, Dean of Research, or Institutional Ethics Officer) in all confirmed cases of serious misconduct (retraction or permanent rejection) for independent institutional investigation.

6. Privacy and Appeals
- Confidentiality: Only those immediately involved in the process (AMIC members, pertinent editors, and the accused party) will be informed of any information pertaining to the investigation.
- Appeals: According to Section 2.2 (Appeal Against Editorial or Ethical misbehavior) of the PTJI Manuscript Appeal Policy, the accused party may appeal final judgments on confirmed misbehavior and the sanctions that follow.