Screening for Plagiarism Policy

I-MARKED (International Journal of Marketing Studies and Environments of Digital Business) is committed to maintaining academic integrity and ensuring the originality and credibility of all published scholarly work. The journal considers plagiarism, duplicate publication, self-plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, and other forms of academic misconduct to be serious violations of publication ethics.

To protect the integrity of the scholarly record, all submitted manuscripts are subject to plagiarism and similarity screening before entering the peer-review process and, where necessary, during subsequent stages of editorial evaluation.

1. Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

All manuscripts submitted to I-MARKED are screened using recognized similarity-detection software, such as Turnitin or iThenticate, at the discretion of the editorial team.

The screening process is intended to identify substantial textual overlap with previously published or publicly available materials, including journal articles, books, conference proceedings, theses, dissertations, websites, and other scholarly or non-scholarly sources.

A similarity score is used as an editorial screening indicator and does not, by itself, constitute a determination of plagiarism. The editorial team evaluates the nature, location, context, and source of any detected similarity before making a decision.

2. Similarity Threshold

I-MARKED applies the following general similarity threshold:

  • Maximum overall similarity: 20%
  • Maximum similarity from a single source: 3%

The similarity percentage may be assessed after excluding legitimate matches where appropriate, such as bibliographic references, commonly used technical terminology, standard methodological expressions, article titles, or properly quoted and cited material.

A manuscript exceeding the applicable threshold may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected before external peer review, depending on the extent and nature of the detected overlap.

Meeting the numerical similarity threshold does not automatically mean that a manuscript is free from plagiarism. Likewise, a similarity score above the threshold does not automatically establish plagiarism. Editorial judgment is based on the substance and context of the identified similarities.

3. Forms of Academic Misconduct

I-MARKED considers the following practices unacceptable:

  • Direct Plagiarism: Presenting another person's words, ideas, data, images, or other intellectual contributions as one's own without appropriate attribution.
  • Mosaic or Patchwork Plagiarism: Combining or modifying material from multiple sources without proper citation or acknowledgment.
  • Self-Plagiarism: Reusing substantial portions of an author's previously published work without appropriate disclosure, citation, or justification.
  • Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Submitting or publishing substantially the same research in more than one publication venue without appropriate disclosure.
  • Improper Paraphrasing: Reproducing the structure or substance of another work with only superficial changes while failing to provide appropriate attribution.
  • Unattributed Use of Data, Figures, Tables, or Other Materials: Using materials created by others without the necessary citation, acknowledgment, or permission where required.

4. Screening Procedure

Plagiarism screening may be conducted at several stages of the publication process:

  1. Initial Screening: Submitted manuscripts are checked before being assigned to external reviewers.
  2. Revision Screening: Revised manuscripts may be screened again when substantial textual changes have been made or when concerns arise during peer review.
  3. Pre-Publication Screening: Accepted manuscripts may undergo a final similarity check before publication.
  4. Post-Publication Investigation: If credible concerns regarding plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct are raised after publication, the journal may conduct an investigation in accordance with applicable publication ethics procedures.

5. Editorial Action

When substantial or inappropriate similarity is identified, the editorial response will depend on the severity, extent, intent, and context of the suspected misconduct.

Possible actions include:

  • Requesting clarification or revision from the authors;
  • Returning the manuscript for correction and proper attribution;
  • Rejecting the manuscript before peer review;
  • Suspending the editorial process pending further clarification or investigation;
  • Rejecting a revised manuscript when concerns remain unresolved;
  • Issuing a correction, expression of concern, or retraction for an article that has already been published, where warranted.

For serious cases of suspected misconduct, I-MARKED may follow relevant Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) procedures and flowcharts.

6. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted manuscripts are original and that all sources, ideas, quotations, data, figures, tables, and other materials obtained from third parties are properly acknowledged and cited.

Before submission, authors should:

  • Verify the originality of the manuscript;
  • Properly cite all sources;
  • Use quotation marks for direct quotations;
  • Paraphrase sources appropriately and provide citations;
  • Obtain permission for copyrighted third-party materials where necessary;
  • Disclose relevant prior publications or closely related manuscripts;
  • Ensure that the manuscript is not simultaneously under consideration by another publication venue.

Submission of a manuscript to I-MARKED constitutes the authors' confirmation that the work complies with the journal's originality and publication ethics requirements.

7. Responsibility of Editors and Reviewers

Editors are responsible for evaluating similarity reports carefully and determining whether detected overlaps represent legitimate similarity or potential academic misconduct.

Reviewers who identify suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate reuse of material, or other ethical concerns should promptly notify the handling editor and provide relevant details or sources where possible.

Similarity reports and related editorial investigations are treated as confidential and are used solely for publication-quality and research-integrity purposes.

8. Use of Artificial Intelligence

The use of Generative AI or Large Language Models (LLMs) does not exempt authors from the journal's plagiarism and originality requirements.

Authors remain responsible for verifying AI-assisted content and ensuring that generated or adapted material does not contain unattributed text, ideas, data, references, or other intellectual property belonging to third parties.

Any use of AI must also comply with the journal's Generative AI Policy and applicable disclosure requirements.

9. Post-Publication Concerns

If credible evidence of plagiarism or other serious originality concerns emerges after publication, I-MARKED will assess the matter promptly and fairly.

Where misconduct is confirmed, the journal may take appropriate corrective action to protect the integrity of the scholarly record, including publication of a correction, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the circumstances.

I-MARKED is committed to handling all allegations of plagiarism and academic misconduct objectively, confidentially, and in accordance with recognized publication ethics standards.