Screening For Plagiarism
1. Policy Statement
Metta: Jurnal Ilmu Multidisiplin, published by Jayapangus Press, is committed to maintaining academic integrity, scholarly originality, and ethical publishing practices across the humanities, social sciences, management, and related multidisciplinary fields. All submitted manuscripts must represent the authors' original scholarly work and comply with established standards of responsible research, academic writing, and publication ethics.
The journal primarily accepts Original Research Articles and Review Articles. In addition, Case Studies and Literary Studies may be considered on a limited and selective basis, provided that they demonstrate substantial scholarly contributions, methodological rigor, and clear relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope.
All manuscript types are subject to the same fundamental principles of academic originality, appropriate attribution, and ethical scholarly communication.
Authors must not use the words, ideas, data, figures, illustrations, theoretical arguments, research findings, textual interpretations, or other intellectual contributions of others without appropriate acknowledgment. All sources must be properly cited at the point where they are used. Direct quotations must be clearly identified, accurately attributed, and used in accordance with applicable copyright and licensing requirements.
The journal strictly prohibits plagiarism, including unattributed copying, inappropriate paraphrasing, misappropriation of ideas, unauthorized reproduction of intellectual materials, and substantial reuse of previously published work without proper disclosure or acknowledgment.
Plagiarism may occur in empirical research, theoretical investigations, literature reviews, case studies, literary analyses, historical interpretations, philosophical discussions, religious studies, social science research, management studies, and other scholarly works within the journal's disciplinary coverage.
The journal recognizes that academic originality must be evaluated in relation to the nature of the research, its disciplinary context, the appropriate use of primary and secondary sources, and the originality of the scholarly contributions presented.
2. Plagiarism Screening Using Turnitin
Metta: Jurnal Ilmu Multidisiplin uses Turnitin to screen submitted manuscripts for textual similarities with published academic literature, online sources, and other documents available in its databases.
All submitted manuscripts, including Original Research Articles, Review Articles, Case Studies, and Literary Studies, undergo an initial similarity screening conducted by the editorial team before being considered for peer review.
The journal establishes a maximum initial screening threshold of 20% similarity, as indicated by the Turnitin Similarity Report.
The 20% threshold is an initial screening benchmark and does not constitute an automatic determination of plagiarism. A similarity score exceeding 20% does not necessarily indicate plagiarism, while a score of 20% or below does not automatically establish originality or guarantee acceptance for peer review.
The similarity percentage must not be interpreted as a plagiarism percentage or as a direct measurement of the manuscript's scholarly originality.
The editorial team retains full responsibility for interpreting similarity reports and determining whether the identified similarities raise concerns regarding academic integrity, intellectual originality, appropriate attribution, or potential publication ethics violations.
Similarity screening must consider the disciplinary characteristics of manuscripts within the humanities, social sciences, and management. Particular attention should be given to legitimate textual similarities arising from established theoretical terminology, historical documents, legal provisions, religious literature, philosophical texts, literary quotations, organizational terminology, and other appropriately acknowledged scholarly materials.
The journal does not rely exclusively on numerical similarity scores to determine whether a manuscript meets its originality requirements.
3. Editorial Assessment of Similarity Reports
The editorial team conducts a contextual, substantive, and discipline-sensitive evaluation of Turnitin Similarity Reports rather than relying exclusively on numerical similarity scores.
The assessment considers the following aspects:
a. Context of Textual Similarity: Whether the matched text consists of commonly used academic expressions, established disciplinary terminology, methodological descriptions, standardized research procedures, properly acknowledged quotations, or potentially inappropriate reproduction of another work.
b. Citations and Attribution: Whether the manuscript properly acknowledges the original sources of borrowed ideas, theoretical arguments, conceptual frameworks, empirical findings, interpretations, data, and textual materials.
c. References and Bibliography: Whether similarities originate from reference lists, bibliographic information, publication titles, or properly cited academic sources, which should not automatically be treated as plagiarism.
d. Substantive Similarity: Whether the manuscript reproduces substantial intellectual content, research findings, theoretical arguments, analytical frameworks, interpretations, or original ideas from other scholarly works without appropriate attribution.
e. Proper Quotation and Paraphrasing: Whether direct quotations are appropriately identified and cited, and whether paraphrased material demonstrates genuine reformulation while accurately acknowledging the original source.
f. Previously Published Work: Whether the manuscript contains substantial overlap with the authors' previously published research without appropriate citation, disclosure, or sufficient new scholarly contributions. Legitimate reuse of previously published materials must be distinguished from inappropriate text recycling, redundant publication, or self-plagiarism.
g. Disciplinary Context and Primary Sources: Whether textual similarities arise from the legitimate use of primary sources, established disciplinary concepts, authoritative documents, or standardized terminology relevant to the research.
For manuscripts within the humanities, editors must consider the legitimate use of literary quotations, religious texts, sacred literature, historical documents, philosophical writings, traditional narratives, cultural materials, and other primary textual sources.
For manuscripts within the social sciences, editors must consider the legitimate use of legal provisions, public policy documents, educational regulations, institutional documents, social theories, established conceptual frameworks, and other relevant research materials.
For manuscripts within management, editors must consider the legitimate use of organizational terminology, accounting standards, financial reporting concepts, corporate governance frameworks, management theories, business documents, and other standardized professional or scholarly materials.
h. Manuscript Type and Scholarly Originality: Whether the identified similarities are consistent with the legitimate scholarly characteristics of the manuscript type and whether the manuscript demonstrates an original intellectual contribution.
For Original Research Articles, the editorial assessment emphasizes the originality of research findings, empirical evidence, theoretical arguments, analytical procedures, and scholarly interpretations.
For Review Articles, the assessment considers the appropriate attribution of reviewed publications and the originality of the critical analysis, literature synthesis, research gap identification, and scholarly conclusions. The legitimate discussion of previously published studies must not be confused with plagiarism when sources are properly acknowledged.
For Case Studies, the assessment examines the appropriate acknowledgment of documentary materials, institutional information, case evidence, existing research findings, and theoretical interpretations. The manuscript must demonstrate original analysis beyond descriptions or reproductions of existing materials.
For Literary Studies, the assessment considers the legitimate use of literary passages, primary texts, historical documents, religious literature, philosophical writings, and other textual materials. Properly attributed textual quotations must be distinguished from the unauthorized reproduction of scholarly interpretations or analytical contributions.
Where appropriate, editors may apply relevant Turnitin report settings or exclusions for bibliographic entries and properly identified quotations. Such adjustments must be applied consistently and must not be used to conceal substantive unattributed similarities.
The editorial evaluation must distinguish between legitimate textual overlap, correctable citation deficiencies, inappropriate text recycling, and substantiated plagiarism.
4. Editorial Actions Based on Screening Results
The editorial team determines appropriate actions based on the Turnitin Similarity Report, the nature and significance of identified overlaps, the manuscript's disciplinary characteristics, and its compliance with academic integrity standards.
a. Manuscripts With Similarity Scores of 20% or Below
Manuscripts with similarity scores of 20% or below may proceed to further editorial evaluation, provided that the identified similarities do not indicate plagiarism, inappropriate duplication, or other violations of publication ethics.
A similarity score within this threshold does not automatically qualify a manuscript for peer review or publication.
The editorial team may request clarification or revision when the report identifies inappropriate textual borrowing, inadequate attribution, substantial intellectual overlap, or other concerns regarding originality, even when the overall similarity score does not exceed 20%.
All manuscripts must demonstrate meaningful scholarly originality and substantial contributions within their respective disciplinary fields.
b. Manuscripts With Similarity Scores Above 20%
Manuscripts exceeding the 20% initial screening threshold are subject to further editorial examination.
Depending on the nature and significance of the identified similarities, the editorial team may:
1) Request clarification from the author concerning the sources and circumstances of the identified textual similarities.
2) Require appropriate revision of overlapping passages, inadequate paraphrasing, or incomplete citations.
3) Request additional documentation or supporting evidence to verify the originality of the manuscript.
4) Require resubmission of the revised manuscript for additional similarity screening.
5) Reject the manuscript when substantial plagiarism, inappropriate duplication, or other serious publication ethics violations are established.
Exceeding the 20% similarity threshold does not automatically result in a finding of plagiarism or mandatory rejection.
The editorial team must evaluate whether the identified similarities arise from legitimate scholarly practices, such as properly attributed quotations, primary textual sources, established disciplinary terminology, or other appropriately acknowledged materials.
Manuscripts that demonstrate substantial scholarly originality may be considered for further evaluation when the identified similarities are appropriately justified and do not constitute plagiarism or other publication ethics violations.
c. Manuscripts With Confirmed Plagiarism
Manuscripts found to contain plagiarism following editorial assessment may be rejected or subjected to other appropriate editorial measures in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics, Allegations of Research Misconduct, and Retraction Policy.
Confirmed plagiarism may involve unattributed reproduction of scholarly texts, misappropriation of intellectual contributions, substantial duplication of previously published materials, or other violations of academic integrity.
Editorial actions must be based on the nature, severity, supporting evidence, and implications of the identified violation.
For manuscripts that have not yet been published, the editorial team may request clarification, require appropriate corrections, suspend further editorial processing, or reject the submission.
For articles that have already been published, substantiated plagiarism concerns must be evaluated under the journal's post-publication procedures. Depending on the seriousness of the violation and its implications for the reliability of the scholarly record, appropriate actions may include publication of a correction, an Expression of Concern, or retraction.
Retractions and substantive scholarly corrections necessary to preserve research integrity shall not incur additional fees. Optional, author-initiated administrative modifications after publication remain subject to the separate conditions established in the journal's Publication Ethics and Retraction Policy.
The final editorial decision rests with the authorized editorial team and must be based on academic evidence, publication ethics, procedural fairness, and the integrity of the scholarly record.
5. Author Responsibilities and Editorial Fairness
Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of their manuscripts, the accuracy of citations, the appropriate acknowledgment of all sources, and compliance with the journal's academic integrity requirements.
Authors must ensure that their manuscripts present original research findings, scholarly analyses, critical interpretations, or literature syntheses appropriate to their disciplinary fields and manuscript types.
Authors must not submit manuscripts containing plagiarism, substantial unattributed textual overlap, inappropriate duplication, misleading attribution, or previously published intellectual materials presented as original scholarly contributions.
When potential plagiarism or inappropriate textual overlap is identified, the editorial team may request explanations, supporting documentation, or manuscript revisions before reaching a final decision.
Authors must cooperate with legitimate editorial inquiries and provide accurate information concerning the originality, sources, and previous dissemination of their research.
All suspected violations must be assessed objectively, confidentially, and fairly, without automatically presuming misconduct based solely on a Turnitin similarity percentage.
The editorial team must distinguish between honest citation errors, legitimate scholarly similarities, differences in disciplinary writing conventions, and intentional or substantial violations of academic integrity.
Authors must be given a reasonable opportunity to clarify identified concerns or provide relevant supporting evidence when appropriate.
Editorial decisions must remain independent of financial considerations, institutional affiliations, personal relationships, or other factors unrelated to scholarly originality and publication ethics.
Metta: Jurnal Ilmu Multidisiplin maintains that scholarly originality cannot be determined exclusively through similarity detection software. Final editorial judgments must be based on contextual evaluation, academic substance, appropriate attribution, disciplinary relevance, and established standards of research and publication ethics.
Through this policy, Metta: Jurnal Ilmu Multidisiplin seeks to ensure transparent plagiarism screening, fair editorial assessment, responsible scholarly publishing, and the protection of academic integrity across the humanities, social sciences, management, and related multidisciplinary fields.
