Plagiarism Detection
In accordance with its publishing ethics and integrity policies, the Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences screens all manuscripts for potential plagiarism as part of its editorial evaluation process. Similarity screening may be conducted at multiple stages of the editorial workflow, including prior to peer review, after completion of the double-blind peer review process, and before final acceptance for publication.
Plagiarism screening is carried out using Turnitin similarity detection software. Similarity reports are not evaluated solely on the basis of numerical percentage scores. Instead, all detected similarities are reviewed carefully and interpreted on a case-by-case basis, with due consideration of disciplinary norms and publishing context. Properly cited quotations, reference lists, bibliographic materials, standard methodological descriptions, and commonly used technical phrases are identified and excluded from concern.
Definition and Scope of Plagiarism
For the purposes of editorial assessment, plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:
-
Direct plagiarism (verbatim copying without appropriate attribution);
-
Mosaic or patchwork plagiarism (substantial paraphrasing without proper acknowledgment);
-
Self-plagiarism or redundant publication (inappropriate reuse of an author’s own previously published work without disclosure or citation);
-
Duplicate or overlapping publication submitted concurrently or previously published elsewhere.
Limited text reuse in methods sections, doctoral or master’s theses, conference papers, or preprints may be acceptable where clearly disclosed and properly cited, and where it does not compromise the originality of the manuscript.
Editorial Assessment and Decision-Making
Where similarities remaining after initial filtering raise substantive concerns, these are examined in detail and reported to the Editorial Board. A high similarity score does not automatically result in rejection; rather, it triggers further editorial investigation to assess the nature, extent, location, and context of the overlap, as well as its impact on the originality and scholarly contribution of the work.
In all cases, authors are given the opportunity to respond to similarity findings and to provide clarification or justification where appropriate. Editorial decisions are made on the basis of both the similarity report and the authors’ explanations.
Based on the outcome of this assessment, the Editorial Board may:
-
request revisions or clarification from the author(s);
-
require correction or removal of problematic overlaps;
-
reject the manuscript in cases of confirmed plagiarism, redundant publication, or other unethical publication practices.
In serious or repeated cases of misconduct, the journal may take additional actions in accordance with COPE guidelines, including notification of the author’s institution or restrictions on future submissions.
Post-Publication Plagiarism
If potential plagiarism is identified after publication, the journal will investigate the matter in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines and COPE flowcharts. Depending on the severity and nature of the case, appropriate corrective actions may include publication of a correction, retraction, or expression of concern. All post-publication actions are clearly identified and permanently linked to the original article to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.
Ethical Oversight
The plagiarism and similarity screening policy applies equally to all submitted manuscripts and to all parties involved in the publication process. Any concerns regarding potential plagiarism involving authors, reviewers, or editorial staff are handled confidentially, transparently, and in line with COPE Core Practices.
The Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences applies rigorous plagiarism screening standards while recognizing that similarity percentages must be interpreted in context. Editorial judgment, guided by international publishing ethics standards, plays a central role in all final decisions.
