General Policy
The Review Journal of Higher-Order Thinking and Metacognition is committed to maintaining originality, academic integrity, and responsible citation practices in all submitted and published manuscripts.
All submissions must represent the authors' original scholarly work. Although review articles necessarily discuss, summarize, and synthesize previously published literature, authors must express their analysis, interpretation, synthesis, and conclusions in their own words and provide accurate attribution to all sources used.
Manuscripts must not contain plagiarism, self-plagiarism, unattributed paraphrasing, inappropriate textual reuse, fabricated citations, citation manipulation, or substantial duplication of previously published material.
Similarity Screening
Every submitted manuscript will be screened by the Editorial Board using Turnitin® or another appropriate similarity-detection system. Similarity screening may be conducted during the initial editorial assessment, after revision, and before final publication.
The journal normally expects the overall similarity score to be 20% or lower. A manuscript with an overall similarity score above 20% may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected when the similarity indicates substantial unattributed copying, inappropriate textual reuse, redundant publication, or another breach of publication ethics.
The similarity percentage is not treated as automatic or conclusive evidence of plagiarism. Editorial decisions are based on a qualitative examination of the similarity report, including the location, extent, source, and nature of the matched text.
A manuscript with a similarity score of 20% or lower may still be rejected if it contains plagiarism, copied arguments, unattributed paraphrasing, misappropriated tables or figures, or other serious forms of improper textual or intellectual reuse.
Interpretation of Similarity Reports
The Editorial Board will distinguish potentially problematic overlap from acceptable similarity. Similarity may arise from:
- properly quoted and cited material;
- reference-list entries;
- standard methodological terminology;
- names of instruments, databases, reporting guidelines, or institutions;
- common academic expressions;
- titles of cited publications;
- previously deposited preprints or repository versions;
- the authors' earlier publications; or
- unattributed copying or inappropriate textual reuse.
Reference lists, properly quoted passages, short technical expressions, and other unavoidable matches may be excluded from the editorial interpretation where appropriate. However, exclusion of such material does not remove the authors' responsibility to cite and attribute all sources correctly.
Editors will pay particular attention to concentrated similarity from a single source, copied sentence structures, repeated paraphrasing that closely follows the source text, and overlap affecting the manuscript's argument, synthesis, discussion, or conclusion.
Forms of Unacceptable Practice
The journal considers the following practices unacceptable:
- copying words, sentences, paragraphs, tables, figures, or ideas without proper attribution;
- paraphrasing a source too closely while retaining its original wording or structure;
- presenting another author's analysis, interpretation, framework, or argument as original work;
- reusing substantial portions of the authors' previously published work without disclosure and appropriate citation;
- submitting substantially the same manuscript to more than one journal;
- translating previously published material and presenting it as a new original manuscript;
- reproducing copyrighted tables, figures, models, or instruments without attribution or required permission;
- citing sources that were not consulted or verified;
- fabricating references or using references generated by artificial intelligence without verification; and
- manipulating citations or references to conceal the original source of copied material.
Plagiarism in Review Articles
Review articles are expected to synthesize existing literature, but synthesis does not permit reproduction of source material without attribution. Authors must critically integrate evidence rather than combine copied summaries from published articles.
Descriptions of theories, findings, methods, and previous reviews must be accurately cited and expressed through original scholarly synthesis. Authors must also avoid excessive dependence on a small number of sources and must represent contrasting findings and perspectives fairly.
Reusing a published review's structure, evidence classification, conceptual framework, tables, coding scheme, or conclusions without proper acknowledgement may constitute plagiarism even when the wording has been changed.
Editorial Actions
Depending on the nature and seriousness of the similarity identified, the Editorial Board may:
- request clarification from the authors;
- return the manuscript for correction before peer review;
- require revision and resubmission of overlapping passages;
- request disclosure of related publications or previous versions;
- reject the manuscript;
- suspend the editorial process while a concern is investigated;
- contact the authors' institution when serious misconduct is suspected;
- publish a correction or expression of concern; or
- retract a published article when plagiarism is confirmed after publication.
Minor similarity that results from properly cited sources or standard academic language will not by itself result in rejection. Conversely, a low similarity score will not protect a manuscript from rejection when qualitative assessment identifies plagiarism or other ethical violations.
Author Responsibilities
Before submission, authors are responsible for ensuring that:
- all borrowed ideas and information are cited accurately;
- direct quotations are clearly identified and appropriately referenced;
- paraphrased material is expressed in genuinely original language;
- all tables, figures, frameworks, and instruments are properly attributed;
- required copyright permissions have been obtained;
- previously published or deposited versions are disclosed;
- all references are authentic, relevant, and personally verified;
- AI-assisted content has been checked for copied or fabricated material; and
- the manuscript has not been submitted simultaneously to another journal.
Authors may be asked to explain or revise identified similarities. Failure to provide a satisfactory explanation or to correct inappropriate overlap may result in rejection.
Post-Publication Plagiarism
Allegations of plagiarism received after publication will be examined by the Editorial Board. Authors will normally be given an opportunity to respond and provide relevant evidence.
When plagiarism or substantial inappropriate reuse is confirmed, the journal may publish a correction, issue an expression of concern, retract the article, notify relevant institutions, or take another action consistent with the journal's Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.
