Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning (JLTL) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and integrity. In alignment with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices, this statement delineates the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process: authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher. It also outlines the journal's policies on misconduct, conflicts of interest, data transparency, and corrections.

1. Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

Editorial Independence: Editors have full authority over the editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Fair Play: Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their academic merit, without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors must not use unpublished information in their own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

Ethical Oversight: Editors are responsible for ensuring the integrity of the publication process. They should take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred.

2. Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original and properly cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

3. Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors.

4. Ethical Oversight and Handling of Misconduct

JLTL is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record. The journal will take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including but not limited to plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the journal will follow COPE's guidelines and flowcharts. If misconduct is confirmed, appropriate actions will be taken, which may include the publication of a retraction or correction.

5. Conflict of Interest Disclosures

All participants in the publication process must disclose any relationships that could be viewed as potential conflicts of interest. Authors must disclose all sources of financial support for the project. Reviewers and editors must disclose any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from the review process if necessary.

6. Policy on Corrections, Retractions, and Withdrawal of Articles

Corrections: When errors are discovered in published articles, the journal will issue corrections as necessary.

Retractions: Articles may be retracted if there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct or honest error.

Withdrawal: Manuscripts may be withdrawn by the authors before publication. Once published, articles can only be retracted, not withdrawn.

7. Archiving and Data Transparency Policies

JLTL encourages authors to share data and materials to enable replication of the research. Authors should be prepared to provide access to data upon reasonable request. The journal ensures digital preservation of content through archiving in recognized repositories.

8. Peer Review and Editorial Decision-Making Processes

JLTL employs a double-blind peer review process. Manuscripts are reviewed by at least two independent experts in the field. The editorial team makes decisions based on the reviewers' reports, the quality of the manuscript, and its relevance to the journal's scope.

 

 

---

Plagiarism Screening Policy: Use of iThenticate

The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning (JLTL) is committed to the highest standards of academic integrity and rigor. As part of our commitment to ensuring the originality of scholarly submissions and maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record, JLTL employs iThenticate, a leading professional plagiarism detection software, prior to initiating the peer review process for all manuscripts submitted to the journal.

Purpose of iThenticate Screening

iThenticate is used by the editorial team as a tool to:

• Detect and prevent all forms of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, mosaic plagiarism, and unreferenced copying of published material.

• Ensure that the manuscript contains original content and that all sources are appropriately cited.

• Maintain the credibility of the journal and protect the intellectual property rights of authors and publishers.

Screening Procedure

1. Initial Check: Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial screening using iThenticate before they are sent out for peer review.

2. Similarity Report: iThenticate generates a similarity index and a detailed report that highlights matched content and its sources across a vast database of academic publications, journals, books, conference proceedings, and web content.

3. Editorial Evaluation:

   • A similarity index above 15% typically triggers a closer investigation.

   • Matches to the author’s own previous work, properly cited quotations, and references are carefully excluded from concern unless they constitute redundant publication or self-plagiarism.

   • If substantial unoriginal content is detected without proper attribution, the manuscript is rejected outright or returned to the author for revision, with a request for proper citation or rewriting of the problematic sections.

4. Post-Revision Check: In certain cases, revised submissions may be re-screened to ensure that previously flagged issues have been resolved.

Editorial Decision-Making Based on iThenticate Results

The decision to proceed with peer review or reject a manuscript based on iThenticate results is at the sole discretion of the editorial board. The journal does not rely solely on the similarity index percentage but engages in a qualitative assessment of the content flagged by the software.

• Minor Overlap (e.g., properly cited references or methodological phrasing): Accepted and noted.

• Moderate Overlap (e.g., excessive reuse of previously published work): Requires revision or proper attribution.

• Severe Overlap (e.g., large sections of unattributed or copied material): Rejection and possible blacklisting of the submission.

Transparency with Authors

Authors are notified if any issues arise during the iThenticate screening and are given the opportunity to clarify, revise, or respond to concerns. However, repeated or egregious violations of ethical standards may result in the manuscript’s permanent rejection and notification to relevant institutions, in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Policy on Self-Plagiarism

JLTL considers the reuse of substantial portions of an author's own previously published work without proper citation or justification to be self-plagiarism, which is equally unacceptable. Authors must inform the editorial office if any part of the manuscript has been previously published or is under consideration elsewhere.

Use of Generative AI

The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning (JLTL) is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity, transparency, and scholarly ethics. As part of our submission criteria, authors must ensure that all manuscripts are original works that contribute meaningfully to the field of language education and applied linguistics.

If any form of Artificial Intelligence (AI)—including but not limited to large language models (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude), grammar-enhancement tools, AI translation services, or content generation platforms—has been used in the preparation of the manuscript, such use must be explicitly and transparently disclosed at the time of submission. Authors should clearly indicate the nature and extent of AI involvement either in the acknowledgements section or in a footnote on the first page of the manuscript.

AI tools must not be listed as co-authors under any circumstance, and authors bear full responsibility for the integrity, originality, and accuracy of the submitted work. The use of AI to generate content that misrepresents data, plagiarizes existing scholarship, or obscures authorship is strictly prohibited and will be treated as a serious ethical breach.