Plagiarism Screening Policy

iRASD Journal of Finance (iRASD-JOF) is committed to publishing original scholarly work and does not tolerate plagiarism, redundant or duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, citation manipulation, or other forms of publication misconduct. The journal’s handling of such concerns is informed by the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

All submitted manuscripts may be screened for textual overlap through appropriate plagiarism-detection software as part of the editorial assessment process. Similarity reports are interpreted by the editorial team in context. A similarity score alone does not determine the editorial decision. The journal considers the nature, extent, location, and source of overlapping material to distinguish acceptable overlap from plagiarism or redundant publication.

Where overlap or duplication is suspected, the journal assesses whether the case involves minor overlap, legitimate text recycling, redundancy, or clear plagiarism. Minor overlap may be addressed through revision, quotation, or improved referencing. Clear plagiarism, substantial unattributed copying, or major redundant publication may result in rejection of the manuscript and, where appropriate, further inquiry.

In such cases, the journal may contact the author or authors in neutral terms, request clarification, revision, or documentary evidence, and, where necessary, contact all listed authors or relevant institutions or bodies responsible for research governance. Review may be suspended while the matter is assessed.

If concerns arise after publication, the journal will investigate the matter in accordance with its ethical policies and relevant COPE guidance. Depending on the outcome, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, notice of duplicate publication, or retraction, and may notify the relevant institution, journal, publisher, or other appropriate authority where necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Where concerns suggest fabricated or falsified data, the journal may seek clarification from the authors, obtain additional expert opinions where appropriate, and refer the matter to the relevant institution or regulatory body for investigation. Confirmed misconduct, or serious unresolved concerns, may result in rejection or retraction, as appropriate.

The journal is committed to handling all such matters fairly, confidentially, consistently, and in a timely manner.