Plagiarism & Similarity Screening Policy
The Journal of Hypermedia & Technology-Enhanced Learning is committed to originality, accurate attribution, and transparent, evidence-based handling of suspected plagiarism and unacceptable overlap before and after publication.
Originality, Attribution & Accountability
J-HyTEL follows recognised publication-ethics guidance, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices. Plagiarism, unattributed reuse, misleading text recycling, and citation manipulation undermine the scholarly record and are not accepted. Copyright and licensing terms are described in the Copyright & License Policy.
Forms of Plagiarism
Plagiarism includes unattributed use or close imitation of another person's words, ideas, data, structure, or intellectual contribution.
Direct Plagiarism
Copying text, ideas, figures, data, or other material from a source without appropriate quotation and citation.
Text Recycling and Unattributed Reuse
Reusing substantial text, data, figures, analyses, or other material from one's own previously disseminated work without transparent citation, disclosure, and a legitimate scholarly justification.
Mosaic Plagiarism
Closely paraphrasing, rearranging, or combining source material while failing to give appropriate credit.
Inadequate or Accidental Attribution
Unattributed or inaccurately attributed use caused by negligence, poor note-taking, citation errors, or misunderstanding of source-use requirements.
Similarity Screening & Contextual Assessment
Similarity reports support editorial judgement; they do not replace manual assessment of context, citation, and legitimate textual overlap.
Similarity-Detection Report
Submitted manuscripts are screened using Turnitin or another journal-approved similarity-detection service. The resulting report supports the journal's initial technical and ethical assessment and is interpreted source by source by an editor.
Adjusted Overall Similarity: Normally No More Than 20%
J-HyTEL normally expects an adjusted overall similarity score of no more than 20% under a consistently applied screening configuration. Before this reference is interpreted, the editor may exclude or separately account for bibliographic references, properly quoted material, small incidental matches, and a verified, appropriately disclosed preprint or another permitted prior version when such treatment is justified and applied consistently. The original unadjusted report is retained. A result above the reference normally triggers further editorial assessment or return for correction; it is not an automatic finding of plagiarism or an automatic rejection.
Manual Context Review
Editors examine matched sources, the location, concentration and extent of overlap, quotation and citation practices, standard terminology, methods language, references, prior dissemination, text recycling, and the overall effect on the manuscript's originality and integrity. Any exclusion or separate accounting must be justified, documented, and applied consistently. A verified match to an appropriately disclosed preprint or another permitted prior version is distinguished from unattributed third-party overlap, but editors still assess attribution, version transparency, duplicated material, and the manuscript's distinct contribution.
Similarity Matches to Preprints
Similarity with an appropriately disclosed preprint or another permitted prior version is not, by itself, evidence of plagiarism or duplicate publication. Authors must provide the complete citation, DOI or stable URL, posting date, and version information confidentially to the editorial office in accordance with the journal's Preprint & Prior Dissemination Policy.
- The editor verifies that the disclosed preprint or prior version belongs to the submitting authors and that its metadata and version history are consistent.
- The editor checks whether the prior version was disclosed accurately and whether the submission is under consideration by another journal.
- The preprint source may be excluded or separately accounted for when interpreting the similarity report; the original report and the editor's assessment are retained in the confidential record.
- Filtering a disclosed source does not make all reuse acceptable. Attribution, text recycling, duplicated data or figures, overlap with third-party sources, and the distinct contribution of the submitted manuscript remain subject to assessment.
- Undisclosed or misleading prior dissemination may result in clarification, return for correction, rejection, or further publication-ethics review, depending on the evidence and seriousness.
Preventive Measures
Authors should resolve attribution and originality concerns before formal submission.
Originality Declaration
Confirm that the manuscript is original, not under review elsewhere, and appropriately acknowledges reused material.
Optional Pre-Submission Review
Authors are encouraged to review originality and attribution before submission. Use of a commercial similarity-checking service is not a submission requirement and does not guarantee acceptance.
Accurate Citation
Quote, paraphrase, and cite sources correctly, including prior work by the same author or research group.
Novel Contribution
Disclose related manuscripts, preprints, conference versions, theses, shared datasets, or earlier publications and explain the distinct contribution of the submitted work.
Response Policy
The journal's response depends on when plagiarism is identified and how seriously it affects the integrity of the manuscript or article.
Initial Screening
A manuscript with an adjusted overall similarity score above the journal's 20% screening reference will normally receive further editorial assessment and may be returned with instructions for correction before external peer review. A manuscript at or below the reference may also be returned, investigated, or rejected when source-by-source assessment identifies plagiarism, concentrated copying, misleading text recycling, undisclosed prior dissemination, or another serious integrity concern.
During Peer Review
If substantive plagiarism is identified during review, the editorial team may terminate the review and reject the manuscript after assessing the evidence.
After Publication
Confirmed post-publication plagiarism may result in a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or another proportionate action under the journal's Withdrawal, Retraction & Correction Policy.
Institutional Notification
Serious cases may be referred to the authors' institutions, funders, or other relevant authorities for additional investigation.
Unreliable or Seriously Compromised Work
A formal retraction notice may be issued when plagiarism materially undermines the article. The scholarly record should remain identifiable, with the article clearly marked as retracted and linked to the notice.
Limited and Correctable Problems
Minor, accidental, or localised problems may be corrected when the article's central findings and integrity remain reliable.
Text Recycling & Reuse of Prior Work
Reuse of previously published or publicly disseminated text, data, figures, or analysis must be transparent and appropriately cited. Authors must show that the new manuscript makes a distinct and meaningful scholarly contribution. Preprints, theses, conference versions, repositories, and related public records must also be disclosed under the journal's Preprint & Prior Dissemination Policy.
- Identify and cite all relevant prior publications.
- Use quotation or clear attribution for reused wording.
- Disclose related manuscripts and overlapping datasets.
- Explain the novelty of the submitted work.
Allegations of Plagiarism
Allegations are assessed based on evidence, proportionality, confidentiality, and procedural fairness.
Initial Investigation
A non-conflicted editor reviews the allegation, supporting evidence, submission or publication history, cited sources, and relevant similarity reports. Anonymous allegations are considered when sufficient evidence is provided.
Author Notification
Authors are informed of substantive concerns and are normally given a reasonable opportunity to provide clarification, source files, permissions, or a formal response.
Editorial Resolution
The authorised editor determines a proportionate outcome, including no action, revision, rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction. The 20% reference supports initial similarity screening; findings of plagiarism and later editorial actions are based on the matched sources, attribution, context, version history, and evidence rather than the percentage alone.
External Notification
Institutions, co-authors, databases, or relevant authorities may be notified when necessary and proportionate.
Relevant and Verifiable Referencing
References must support the claims for which they are cited. Authors must not add irrelevant references, excessive self-citations, reciprocal citations, or unnecessary citations to J-HyTEL for the purpose of influencing citation indicators.
- Every reference-list entry must be cited in the manuscript.
- Every in-text citation must correspond to the correct source.
- DOIs and URLs should be checked where available.
- Reference errors that do not invalidate the article are corrected rather than treated as automatic grounds for retraction.
Transparency & Shared Responsibility
Authors and co-authors share responsibility for the integrity of the submitted work. The journal documents significant editorial actions and communicates outcomes to affected parties in accordance with confidentiality, fairness, and publication-ethics guidance.
Plagiarism Management Resources
Consult the following resources for additional guidance on plagiarism screening, submitted manuscripts, and published articles.
Effective Date & Review
Effective: 24 July 2026. Last reviewed: 5 August 2026. This policy should be reviewed periodically and updated when journal procedures or applicable publication-ethics guidance change.