PLAGIARISM CHECK

1. Policy Statement

Journal Interdisciplinary Health (JIH) is committed to originality, accurate attribution, research integrity, and transparent scholarly publishing. Plagiarism, deliberate misrepresentation of authorship, inappropriate text recycling, redundant publication, and citation manipulation are not permitted. The journal's procedures are informed by the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

2. Mandatory Similarity Screening

Every manuscript is screened using Turnitin during initial editorial assessment and before external peer review. The editorial office reviews the similarity report to determine the nature, extent, and location of matched text.

JIH applies a maximum acceptable overall similarity index of 20% as an initial screening threshold. Manuscripts exceeding 20% are returned to the corresponding author for mandatory revision and must be rescreened before further editorial consideration. Passing this numerical threshold does not guarantee acceptance or establish that a manuscript is free from plagiarism.

Editors assess matches contextually, including quoted passages, bibliographic references, standard methodological terminology, appropriately attributed material, and potentially problematic similarities in original analysis or interpretation. Similarity-report exclusions, where used, must be applied consistently and must not conceal substantive overlap.

3. Forms of Unacceptable Overlap

• Direct plagiarism: Reproducing another person's words, data, ideas, figures, or other work without appropriate acknowledgment or permission.
• Paraphrasing plagiarism: Rewriting source material while retaining its substantive content without proper citation.
• Inappropriate text recycling: Reusing substantial portions of one's own previously disseminated text without disclosure or adequate citation.
• Redundant or duplicate publication: Publishing substantially overlapping findings without transparent disclosure, justification, and appropriate cross-reference.
• Misappropriation of data or images: Presenting material created by others as original, or using it without necessary permission.
• Citation manipulation: Adding irrelevant or coercive citations to influence citation metrics rather than support scholarly claims.

4. Editorial Assessment and Decision

Similarity reports are interpreted by editors and are not used as automatic plagiarism verdicts. When potentially problematic overlap is identified, editors may request an explanation, original sources, permission documentation, or a revised manuscript. The seriousness of a concern is determined by the nature and significance of the overlap, not merely its percentage.

5. Author Responsibilities

Authors must submit original work; accurately cite all sources; clearly distinguish quotations from their own writing; disclose related manuscripts, preprints, and prior dissemination; obtain permissions for protected third-party material; and respond accurately to editorial questions. Authors must not manipulate similarity reports or intentionally conceal overlapping content.

Authors asked to revise must correct inappropriate overlap, retain necessary and accurate citations, provide a clear explanation of changes, and submit the manuscript for rescreening. Merely substituting synonyms to evade similarity detection is not an acceptable revision.

6. Preprints, Theses, and Related Publications

Prior dissemination in a preprint server, thesis repository, conference abstract, or related outlet must be disclosed at submission. Such dissemination is not automatically treated as plagiarism or duplicate publication. Editors assess the journal's applicable prior-publication rules, the extent of overlap, copyright status, and transparent citation of the earlier work.

7. Reviewer and Editor Responsibilities

Editors and reviewers must maintain manuscript confidentiality, declare relevant conflicts of interest, and assess possible overlap objectively. Reviewers who identify suspected plagiarism or redundant publication should report their concerns confidentially to the editor, with supporting sources where possible. Allegations must not be communicated publicly before a fair assessment.

8. Handling Allegations of Misconduct

When a credible concern arises, the editorial office documents the allegation, examines available evidence, and gives the corresponding author a reasonable opportunity to respond. Depending on the findings, the journal may require revision, reject a submission, consult the author's institution or other relevant body, or take appropriate post-publication action. Decisions are based on documented evidence and proportionality.

9. Post-Publication Corrections and Retractions

Concerns discovered after publication are assessed under the journal's Publication Ethics policy and applicable COPE guidance. Where warranted, the journal may publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction, with a clear notice linked to the original article. The publication record should remain transparent and traceable.

10. Appeals and Confidentiality

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal or clarification regarding a similarity-related editorial decision to the editorial office. Appeals are evaluated impartially, with appropriate management of conflicts of interest. Similarity reports and manuscript materials are handled confidentially and accessed only for legitimate editorial purposes.