Abdiku Negeri: Jurnal Pengabdian untuk Pendidikan is committed to maintaining academic integrity and publishing original scholarly work. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subject to plagiarism and text-similarity screeningas part of the editorial quality-control process.

The screening process is conducted to identify potential plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, duplicate publication, and excessive similarity with previously published or publicly available materials.

1. Screening Policy

Every submitted manuscript will undergo similarity screening before the peer-review process.

Additional similarity screening may be conducted:

• after manuscript revision;
• before final acceptance;
• before publication; or
• whenever the Editor identifies a potential originality concern.

The journal may use recognized similarity-detection software, such as Turnitin, iThenticate, or other comparable tools, depending on availability.

Similarity-detection software provides evidence of textual overlap, but a similarity score alone does not establish plagiarism. The Editor will examine the sources, context, location, and nature of the matched text before making an editorial decision. This approach is consistent with established similarity-screening practices in scholarly publishing.

2. Similarity Threshold

As a general editorial guideline, the journal expects submitted manuscripts to have a similarity index of no more than 20%, excluding legitimate similarities such as:

• bibliography or reference lists;
• properly cited quotations;
• standard methodological terminology;
• commonly used academic phrases;
• institutional or policy terminology; and
• other unavoidable technical expressions.

The 20% threshold is an editorial screening guideline, not an automatic acceptance or rejection criterion.

A manuscript with a similarity score below 20% may still contain plagiarism if substantial unattributed material is identified. Conversely, a manuscript with a similarity score above 20% may not necessarily constitute plagiarism if the overlap is legitimate and appropriately cited.

The Editor therefore evaluates the nature and source of the similarity, rather than relying solely on the overall percentage.

3. Types of Similarity Examined

During screening, the Editorial Team may examine potential cases of:

a. Direct Plagiarism

Using another person's words, ideas, data, or intellectual work without appropriate acknowledgment or citation.

b. Improper Paraphrasing

Reproducing the structure or substance of another work by changing only a few words without adequate citation.

c. Self-Plagiarism and Text Recycling

Reusing substantial portions of the author's previously published work without appropriate disclosure, citation, or justification.

d. Duplicate Publication

Submitting or publishing substantially the same work in more than one journal or publication venue.

e. Unattributed Use of Online Sources

Copying or reproducing material from websites, institutional documents, reports, or other online sources without proper acknowledgment.

f. Unethical Reuse of Published Material

Using tables, figures, photographs, instruments, or other copyrighted materials without appropriate attribution or permission where permission is required.

4. Screening Procedure

The plagiarism-screening process generally follows these steps:

Manuscript Submission → Initial Editorial Screening → Similarity Check → Editorial Assessment of Matches → Author Revision (if required) → Re-screening → Peer Review

The Editor may request clarification or revision when potentially problematic similarities are identified.

5. Editorial Assessment of Similarity Reports

The similarity report is reviewed by the Editor or an authorized member of the Editorial Team.

The assessment considers:

• overall similarity percentage;
• individual matching sources;
• length of matched passages;
• location of matching text;
• whether the material is properly cited;
• whether the similarity involves the authors' previous publications;
• whether the overlap occurs in standard terminology or methodology;
• whether substantial intellectual content has been reproduced; and
• the overall originality of the manuscript.

Similarity reports are therefore treated as screening evidence rather than definitive proof of plagiarism. Similarity-checking systems identify matching or overlapping text, while the editorial team determines whether the overlap is academically acceptable or constitutes misconduct.

6. Actions Based on Screening Results

Depending on the severity and nature of the similarity, the journal may take one of the following actions.

Low or Acceptable Similarity

If the identified similarities are legitimate, properly cited, and do not raise concerns regarding originality, the manuscript may proceed to the next stage of the editorial process.

Moderate Similarity

If inappropriate similarity is identified but can reasonably be corrected, the manuscript may be returned to the authors for revision.

Authors may be required to:

• paraphrase the relevant sections;
• provide missing citations;
• rewrite improperly reproduced passages;
• clarify the use of previously published material; or
• revise other problematic content.

The manuscript may be screened again after revision.

Serious Similarity or Suspected Plagiarism

If substantial unattributed overlap or other serious originality concerns are identified, the manuscript may be:

• rejected before peer review;
• rejected after peer review;
• returned to the authors for explanation;
• subjected to further editorial investigation; or
• handled according to applicable publication-ethics procedures.

Where appropriate, the journal may contact the authors' affiliated institution or other relevant parties.

7. Plagiarism Detected After Publication

If plagiarism, duplicate publication, or significant text-reuse is discovered after publication, the journal will investigate the matter in accordance with applicable publication-ethics principles.

Depending on the findings and severity of the case, the journal may:

• contact the authors for an explanation;
• issue a correction;
• publish an editorial notice;
• issue a retraction;
• remove or amend the article where ethically and legally necessary; or
• notify the relevant institution or other appropriate parties.

The journal will take appropriate measures to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

8. Authors' Responsibility

Authors are fully responsible for ensuring the originality and proper attribution of their manuscripts.

Before submission, authors are strongly encouraged to:

• check the manuscript for plagiarism and text similarity;
• properly paraphrase and cite all sources;
• use quotation marks for direct quotations;
• provide citations for ideas, data, and materials derived from other sources;
• disclose relevant previous publications;
• avoid duplicate or simultaneous submission; and
• obtain permission where copyrighted materials require permission for reuse.

Submission of a manuscript constitutes the authors' confirmation that the work is original and has been appropriately attributed.

9. Confidentiality of Screening Reports

Similarity reports and related editorial assessments are treated as confidential editorial documents.

The journal will not publicly disclose similarity reports or internal screening assessments unless disclosure is necessary for legitimate publication-ethics, legal, or institutional purposes.

10. Generative AI and Plagiarism Screening

The use of Generative AI tools does not exempt authors from the requirement to ensure originality and appropriate attribution.

Authors remain responsible for:

• the accuracy of their manuscript;
• the originality of the submitted content;
• appropriate citation of sources;
• verification of references;
• disclosure of relevant AI use where required by journal policy; and
• compliance with academic and publication ethics.

Similarity screening is not intended to determine whether a manuscript was generated by artificial intelligence. AI-generated text and plagiarism are distinct issues and may require different forms of editorial assessment.

11. Editorial Independence

Similarity screening results do not automatically determine the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript.

The final decision remains the responsibility of the Editor and is based on the overall assessment of:

• originality;
• academic quality;
• relevance;
• methodological rigor;
• ethical compliance;
• reviewer recommendations; and
• the nature and seriousness of any identified similarity.

12. Publication Ethics

Abdiku Negeri: Jurnal Pengabdian untuk Pendidikan considers plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct to be serious violations of publication ethics.

The journal follows recognized principles and best practices in scholarly publishing and may refer to relevant Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidance when handling suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other ethical concerns.

The journal is committed to ensuring that all published articles represent genuine scholarly contributions and that the integrity of the academic record is protected.