Allegations of Misconduct

Tamumatra: Jurnal Seni Pertunjukan considers concerns about the integrity of submitted and published work, peer review, and editorial conduct. Reports are assessed on their evidence and relevance. An allegation is not a finding of misconduct, and a disagreement about an artistic interpretation or teaching approach is not, by itself, evidence of wrongdoing.

Concerns covered by this policy

Examples include plagiarism; fabricated or falsified evidence; misleading alteration of images, audio, or video; duplicate publication; manipulated peer review; misrepresented authorship; undisclosed conflicts of interest; and serious breaches of participant consent or permissions. In arts research, concerns may involve invented interviews or classroom observations, unattributed choreography or musical material, inaccurate descriptions of performance documentation, or disclosure of restricted community knowledge.

Ordinary editing of performance recordings is not automatically misconduct. The question is whether editing, selection, or presentation misrepresents the evidence or conceals information needed to assess the article. Authors should explain consequential alterations and distinguish research documentation from an artistic reconstruction or illustration.

How to report a concern

Send a report through Contact Us. Identify the article or submission, describe the concern, and provide specific supporting material, such as passages, citations, recording timestamps, or relevant documentation. Avoid sending unnecessary personal information about students, workshop participants, performers, or community members. Anonymous reports will be considered when they contain sufficiently specific, verifiable evidence.

Assessment and fair process

An editor without a relevant conflict of interest will assess whether the report falls within the journal's responsibilities and whether further information is needed. A complaint involving the handling editor should be referred to an uninvolved editorial board member or the publisher using the journal's contact details. A person whose conduct is under review must not decide the outcome of that complaint.

The journal will normally explain the substantive concern to the authors or other person concerned and give them a reasonable opportunity to respond and supply evidence. Editors may seek independent advice or refer questions requiring a formal investigation to the relevant institution or responsible organisation. The journal assesses publication integrity; it cannot replace an institutional investigation or settle every dispute about artistic ownership.

Information will be shared only as needed to assess the concern, obtain a response, or communicate with an appropriate investigating body. The journal will seek to protect confidential information and complainants' identities, while recognising that absolute confidentiality cannot always be maintained. Participants' privacy and culturally sensitive materials require particular care.

Possible outcomes and reconsideration

Depending on the evidence, the editors may close an unsupported concern, request clarification or revision, pause or reject a submission, publish a correction or expression of concern, or retract an article. Actions affecting published work will explain the reason and be linked to the article. An author may comment on proposed action, but refusal to agree does not prevent an editorial correction or retraction when justified.

A request for reconsideration should identify new evidence or a specific procedural error and be sent through Contact Us. An uninvolved editor or publisher representative should review a challenge concerning the original decision-maker.