Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

 

This statement applies to all submissions to JoLIE and is reviewed periodically by the editorial team. The Journal of Linguistic and Intercultural Education (JoLIE) is committed to maintaining high standards of ethical publishing, academic integrity, and scholarly responsibility. The journal adheres to the principles and best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available at: publicationethics.org.

 

1. Originality, authorship, and conflicts of interest

JoLIE considers only manuscripts that are original, have not been published previously, and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Submission of a manuscript confirms that all authors have approved its submission and that the work is submitted exclusively to JoLIE for evaluation.

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a substantial scholarly contribution to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the research. All individuals who meet the authorship criteria should be listed as authors, and all listed authors should approve the submitted version of the manuscript.

Authors are expected to establish the definitive list and order of authors at the time of initial submission. Any request to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be made in writing to the Editor, must include a clear justification, and must be accompanied by the written agreement of all authors, including any author being added or removed. Such changes are subject to editorial approval and may delay the review or publication process. Requests for changes to authorship after publication will be considered only where justified and may require a formal correction to the published record.

In the final article, authors must provide an Authors’ Contributions statement describing each author’s contribution to the work. Individuals or organisations that contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship may be recognised in the Acknowledgements section.

Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their work. If no conflicts of interest exist, this should be stated explicitly. All sources of funding supporting the research must also be disclosed. The relevant Funding and Conflicts of Interest statements must be included in the final article in accordance with the JoLIE manuscript template.

 

2. Research integrity and ethical conduct

Authors are responsible for providing an accurate and transparent account of the research conducted and sufficient methodological information to permit evaluation and, where appropriate, verification or replication. Fabrication, falsification, manipulation, or deliberately misleading reporting of data or findings constitutes serious research misconduct.

Authors must include a Data Availability Statement in the final article, indicating whether and where the data supporting the study are available. If data availability is not applicable, this should be stated.

Research involving human participants or animals must comply with applicable ethical, legal, and institutional requirements. Research involving personal data or other sensitive information must likewise comply with applicable data-protection and confidentiality requirements. Where ethical approval is required, authors must identify the approving institution or ethics committee and provide the relevant approval information. For research involving human participants, authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained where applicable and that participants" privacy and confidentiality were protected. Particular care must be taken where research involves children, vulnerable populations, or sensitive personal data.

The final article must include an Ethics Approval statement identifying the approving ethics committee or institutional review board and the approval/reference number, where applicable. If ethical approval was not required, this should be stated.

 

 

3. Plagiarism and similarity screening

JoLIE does not tolerate plagiarism, inappropriate textual overlap, duplicate publication, fabrication, falsification, or other forms of academic misconduct.

All manuscripts are subject to similarity screening using Sistemantiplagiat software. Similarity reports are assessed contextually by the editorial team and are not interpreted solely on the basis of a numerical similarity score. Legitimate scholarly overlap, including references, appropriately quoted material, standard terminology, and commonly used methodological language, is taken into account.

Where there are reasonable grounds to suspect undisclosed use of generative AI, the editorial team may conduct additional checks using Turnitin"s AI-writing detection functionality. The result of such a check is treated as an indicator requiring further editorial assessment and does not, by itself, constitute evidence of misconduct.

Authors may be asked to clarify or provide information concerning the preparation of their manuscript where questions arise regarding originality, attribution, or undisclosed use of generative AI.

Confirmed plagiarism or other serious breaches of academic integrity may result in rejection of a manuscript or, where an article has already been published, appropriate post-publication action in accordance with the procedures set out below.

 

4. Use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools

JoLIE permits the responsible and transparent use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in manuscript preparation, provided that such tools do not replace the authors" scholarly judgement or responsibility.

Where generative AI tools have been used in preparing a manuscript, authors must identify the tool(s) and briefly describe how they were used in the AI Use Disclosure. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, appropriate attribution, and integrity of all submitted content. AI tools must not be listed as authors and must not be used to fabricate or falsify data, references, quotations, findings, or other scholarly content. If no generative AI tools were used, the final article must state: “The authors declare that no generative AI tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript.”

Where AI tools form part of the research methodology rather than merely assisting in manuscript preparation, their use must be described transparently in the relevant methodological section.

Submitted manuscripts are confidential documents. Reviewers and editors must not upload a submitted manuscript, or any part of it, to a generative AI or AI-assisted tool. Generative AI must not be used to replace the independent critical assessment and judgement required in peer review or editorial decision-making.

 

5. Editorial and peer-review ethics

Editors and reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts and associated correspondence as confidential. Unpublished material disclosed in a submission must not be used for personal advantage or research without the author"s explicit written consent.

Editorial decisions must be based on scholarly merit, relevance to the journal, and compliance with JoLIE"s editorial and ethical requirements. Editors and reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest that could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their impartiality.

Guest editors of special issues are subject to the same ethical and confidentiality requirements and operate under the oversight of the Editor-in-Chief.

 

6. Corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, and the scholarly record

JoLIE is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. Authors who identify a significant error in a published article should notify the Editor as soon as possible.

Where an error does not invalidate the principal findings or conclusions of an article, JoLIE may publish a correction. Where serious concerns about the reliability or integrity of an article remain unresolved while an investigation is ongoing, the journal may publish an expression of concern.

An article may be retracted where there is clear evidence that its findings are unreliable as a result of serious error or misconduct, including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, serious authorship irregularities, compromised peer review, unethical research, or other substantial breaches of publication ethics. Retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record rather than to punish authors.

Wherever practicable, a retracted article will remain part of the publication record, will be clearly identified as retracted, and will be linked to a retraction notice explaining the reason for the action. Removal of a published article will be considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as serious legal, privacy, or safety concerns, where retraction alone would be insufficient.

Decisions concerning corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or removal will be made by the Editor in accordance with relevant COPE guidance and the circumstances of the individual case.

 

Last updated: September 2026