Diksi publishes only original work and does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. This policy:

• defines plagiarism;
• explains how manuscripts are checked;
• sets out the step-by-step procedures and sanctions that apply at each stage of the publication process.

It follows the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). It should be read together with the journal’s Publication Ethics, Research Misconduct, Generative AI Policy, and Correction & Retraction policies.

1. What Counts as Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the use of another person’s ideas, words, data, images, or work without proper acknowledgement, presented as one’s own. It includes:

• Verbatim (direct) plagiarism: copying text word for word without quotation marks and citation.
• Paraphrasing plagiarism: rewording another author’s text or ideas closely without citation, or with only a citation but no change in structure.
• Mosaic (patchwork) plagiarism: combining phrases and sentences from several sources into a new text without proper attribution.
• Translation plagiarism: translating another author’s work (e.g., from Indonesian, Malay, or Arabic into English) and presenting it as original writing without citation.
• Idea plagiarism: using another person’s original ideas, theoretical frameworks, research designs, or interpretations without acknowledgement.
• Data, figure, and table plagiarism: using others’ data, tables, figures, or images without permission and citation.
• Self-plagiarism (text recycling): reusing substantial parts of one’s own published work, including theses, dissertations, or conference papers, without citation and disclosure.
• Duplicate publication: publishing the same or substantially the same study, data, or findings in more than one outlet.
• Disguised plagiarism: using paraphrasing tools, “text spinners”, or generative AI to disguise copied text. Such text often contains tortured phrases, such as “counterfeit consciousness” for “artificial intelligence”.
• Citation plagiarism: copying citations from a secondary source without consulting the original, or citing sources that were never read.

What is not considered plagiarism

• Properly quoted and cited text, including short quotations from interviews, documents, or legal texts.
• Common knowledge, standard terminology, and standard phrases.
• Limited reuse of the authors’ own methodological descriptions, when the earlier source is cited.
• Publication of a manuscript previously posted as a preprint, or developed from a thesis or dissertation, or presented at a conference without formal proceedings, provided that this is disclosed at submission and the earlier version is cited where relevant.

2. Similarity Checking

2.1 When checks are made

1. At initial screening, within 7 days of submission, before the manuscript is sent to review.
2. After revision, if substantial new text has been added.
3. Before publication, on the final accepted version.
4. After publication, if a concern is raised by a reader or another party.

2.2 Tools

• The journal uses similarity-detection software (e.g., Turnitin or iThenticate/Crossref Similarity Check). The software compares manuscripts with published articles, books, theses, websites, and repositories.
• Editors may also check for translation plagiarism, tortured phrases, and fabricated references, and may compare the manuscript with the authors’ earlier publications.

2.3 Thresholds and interpretation

Reports are always read by an editor. Matches with references, properly quoted material, standard phrases, the journal template, and the authors’ own preprint are disregarded. A low score does not prove originality; for example, translated, paraphrased, or idea plagiarism may not be detected. A high score does not prove plagiarism. The nature, location, and extent of the overlap matter more than the percentage: copied text in the Results, Discussion, or Conclusion is more serious than overlap in the Method.

3. Procedures

3.1 Plagiarism detected before or during review

1. Screening. The editor runs the similarity check and examines the report, identifying the overlapping passages and their sources.
2. Classification. The editor decides whether the overlap is:
   • minor: short passages, poor paraphrasing, or missing citations that suggest a misunderstanding rather than an intention to deceive;
   • major: substantial copying of text, ideas, or data; duplicate submission or publication; disguised plagiarism.
3. Minor cases. The manuscript is returned to the authors with the annotated report and asked to rewrite and cite properly within 7 days. The revised manuscript is checked again before review continues.
4. Major cases. The editor writes to the corresponding author, enclosing the evidence and asking for an explanation within 14 days.
5. Decision. If the explanation is not satisfactory, or no response is received, the manuscript is rejected. Depending on the seriousness, the sanctions in Section 4 may apply.
6. Record. The case is documented confidentially.

3.2 Plagiarism detected after acceptance but before publication

1. Publication is put on hold.
2. The authors are asked for an explanation within 14 days.
3. Minor problems are corrected before publication. In major cases, the acceptance is withdrawn and the manuscript is rejected.

3.3 Plagiarism detected in a published article

1. Report and acknowledgement. Anyone may report suspected plagiarism to the Editor-in-Chief, giving the DOI and evidence. The report is acknowledged within 7 working days, and the identity of the person reporting it is kept confidential.
2. Assessment. Within 14 days, the editors compare the article with the alleged source(s). They may consult an independent expert.
3. Author response. The authors are asked to explain within 30 days.
4. Escalation. If the explanation is not satisfactory or there is no response, the editors contact the authors’ institution(s) and, where relevant, the publisher of the original source.
5. Outcome.
   • Limited overlap or missing citations that do not affect the article’s originality: a corrigendum adds the missing citations.
   • Substantial plagiarism or duplicate publication: the article is retracted, and a notice is linked to the article (see the Correction & Retraction policy).
6. Communication. The authors, the person who reported the case, the original authors (where appropriate), and the institutions involved are informed of the outcome.

4. Sanctions

Sanctions are proportionate to the seriousness of the case, whether it was intentional, and whether it was repeated:

1. Instruction to rewrite and cite properly (minor cases).
2. Rejection of the manuscript.
3. A corrigendum or retraction of a published article.
4. A formal letter to the authors’ institution(s) and, where relevant, the funder.
5. A ban on submissions to the journal for two to five years for serious or repeated plagiarism.
6. Notification of other journals in cases of duplicate submission or publication.

Authors may appeal against a decision within 30 days, as described in the Peer Review Process and Research Misconduct policies.

5. Guidance for Authors: How to Avoid Plagiarism

• Put quotation marks around any wording taken from a source, and give the author, year, and page number (APA 7th edition), e.g., (Nurgiyantoro, 2013, p. 12).
• When paraphrasing, change both the wording and the structure, and still cite the source.
• Cite the original source you actually read. When you rely on a secondary source, say so, e.g., “(Dewey, 1916, as cited in Banks, 2017)”.
• Cite your own earlier work, including theses and conference papers, and explain at submission how the manuscript differs from it.
• Obtain written permission to reproduce figures, tables, or images from other publications, and acknowledge the source in the caption.
• Do not use paraphrasing tools or generative AI to rewrite others’ text. Disclose any AI use as required by the Generative AI Policy.
• If you translate your own published work, disclose this to the editor. It counts as duplicate publication unless both editors agree and the original is cited.
• Check your manuscript with a similarity tool before submission, if your institution provides one, and revise any problematic passages.

Sources

• Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., & Magazinov, A. (2021). Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science. Evidence of critical issues affecting established journals [Preprint]. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.06751
• Committee on Publication Ethics. (2017). Core practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
• Committee on Publication Ethics. (2019). Retraction guidelines (Version 2). https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4
• Committee on Publication Ethics. (n.d.). Flowcharts [Suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript; suspected plagiarism in a published article; suspected redundant publication]. https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts
• Crossref. (n.d.). Similarity Check. https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/
• Roig, M. (2015). Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. Office of Research Integrity. https://ori.hhs.gov/avoiding-plagiarism-self-plagiarism-and-other-questionable-writing-practices-guide-ethical-writing
• Wager, E. (2014). Defining and responding to plagiarism. Learned Publishing, 27(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1087/20140105