The Archives of Psychiatry and Mental Health (APMH) is committed to publishing original, ethical, and academically sound scholarly work. APMH considers plagiarism a serious violation of research integrity, intellectual honesty, and academic ethics. This updated Plagiarism Policy expands significantly upon the predecessor website’s basic statements on originality checking and introduces a comprehensive, COPE-aligned framework for detection, handling, classification, and remediation of plagiarism and related misconduct.

Definition of Plagiarism

APMH defines plagiarism as the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. This definition includes literal text copying, paraphrasing without attribution, idea plagiarism, image duplication, and replication of data without permission.

Plagiarism includes but is not limited to:

Direct plagiarism: Verbatim copying of text without quotation or citation.
Mosaic plagiarism: Borrowing phrases or ideas and mixing them with one’s own writing without proper attribution.
Self-plagiarism: Republishing one’s own previously published work without acknowledgment.
Data plagiarism: Presenting another person’s data as one’s own.
Image manipulation and reuse: Altering or reusing images without disclosure or permission.
Improper paraphrasing: Making minor changes to previously published text without proper citation.

All forms of plagiarism are unacceptable and result in editorial action consistent with COPE guidelines.

Use of Plagiarism Detection Tools

APMH uses industry-standard plagiarism detection tools such as iThenticate, Turnitin, or Crossref Similarity Check before peer review and again at final acceptance. The predecessor site mentioned the use of similarity checking in editorial workflow; this enhanced framework formalizes and expands the process.

Reports are evaluated manually, as similarity percentages alone do not determine plagiarism. Editors assess:

Context and nature of the similarity
Improper or missing citations
Overlap with previously published works
Overlap with the authors' own prior publications
Similarity in methods, background, or literature review discussions

Acceptable Similarity Thresholds

APMH does not follow a rigid numerical threshold because similarity varies by discipline. However, general guidelines include:

Overall similarity below 15% is usually acceptable with appropriate citations.
Similarity between 15%–30% requires editorial scrutiny and may require revision.
Over 30% often indicates significant problems needing major revision or rejection.

The presence of copied sentences without citation is treated seriously irrespective of the overall percentage.

Types of Plagiarism Addressed

Type	Description	APMH Action
Textual Plagiarism	Copying sentences, paragraphs, or structure without proper citation.	Revision or rejection depending on severity.
Self-Plagiarism	Reusing author’s own previously published material.	Mandatory citation or rewrite; serious cases lead to rejection.
Data Plagiarism	Using others’ data, statistics, or results without attribution.	Immediate rejection; may involve institutional reporting.
Image Plagiarism	Using figures or images without permission or attribution.	Must obtain permission or replace images; severe cases rejected.
Idea Plagiarism	Repurposing another’s conceptual work without acknowledgment.	Investigation and possible rejection.

Editorial Actions When Plagiarism Is Detected

APMH follows COPE guidelines in responding to plagiarism:

If detected before peer review:

Manuscript may be sent back to authors for revision.
Or rejected outright for severe plagiarism.

If detected during peer review:

Review process may be suspended.
Authors asked for clarification or correction.
Severe cases may result in rejection.

If detected after acceptance but before publication:

Acceptance may be withdrawn.
Authors must provide corrected versions.

If detected after publication:

Correction or retraction published as appropriate.
Institutions may be notified.
Future submissions may be barred.

Self-Plagiarism and Duplicate Publication

Self-plagiarism—reusing significant portions of one's previously published work without citation—is considered unethical because it misrepresents the novelty of the research.

APMH prohibits:

Duplicate submissions to different journals
Publishing nearly identical articles (“salami slicing”)
Reusing previously published figures or text without attribution

Exceptions exist for:

Thesis-based publications with acknowledgment
Preprints deposited on servers like PsyArXiv or medRxiv (with disclosure)

Text Overlap Allowed With Conditions

Certain sections may contain limited overlap:

Methods description in highly standardized procedures
Technical terminology
Definitions commonly used in psychiatry and mental health research
Statements of established knowledge

However, even in these cases, authors must cite original sources when appropriate.

Image and Figure Integrity

APMH prohibits:

Reusing images without permission
Manipulating images to misrepresent data
Using stock images in clinical contexts without disclosure

Authors must disclose any image adjustments (brightness, contrast, cropping).

AI-Generated Text and Plagiarism Concerns

Authors may use AI tools for grammar, formatting, or language refinement, but:

AI-generated content must be original and free of plagiarism.
Authors must not use AI to insert copyrighted text from unknown sources.
Full responsibility for originality remains with human authors.

APMH may screen AI-assisted manuscripts with enhanced similarity detection tools.

Author Responsibilities

Authors must ensure:

All content is original.
All borrowed material is appropriately cited.
Permissions are obtained for copyrighted materials.
All co-authors approve the final manuscript.
Similarity concerns are addressed before submission.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers contribute to plagiarism prevention by:

Reporting suspected plagiarism immediately.
Identifying overlapping publications.
Maintaining confidentiality.

Editor Responsibilities

Editors must:

Evaluate similarity reports carefully.
Apply COPE guidelines fairly.
Ensure transparency in decisions.
Protect author confidentiality during investigations.

Real-World Scenario

Scenario: A manuscript on adolescent behavioral therapy shows a 32% similarity index, with large blocks copied from a published study. The editor contacts the authors, requesting justification. The authors admit improper paraphrasing. The manuscript is rejected, and authors are asked to rewrite and resubmit. This ensures academic honesty and protects the integrity of the literature.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q: Is a similarity score above 20% automatically plagiarism?: No. Editors evaluate context, citations, and intention.
Q: Is paraphrasing sufficient to avoid plagiarism?: No. Even paraphrased ideas must be cited.
Q: Can I reuse my own previously published text?: Yes, but only with citation and transparency.
Q: Is preprint posting considered prior publication?: No. Preprints are allowed but must be disclosed.
Q: What happens after a plagiarism allegation?: An investigation is initiated, following COPE protocols.

Conclusion

APMH upholds strict anti-plagiarism standards to ensure originality, credibility, and scholarly integrity. By combining advanced plagiarism detection tools with rigorous editorial oversight and internationally recognized ethical guidelines, the journal safeguards the trustworthiness of the mental health research it publishes.