Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement
Archipelagic Studies in Language, Literature, and Education (ASLLE) is committed to maintaining the integrity, transparency, fairness, and reliability of the scholarly record. This policy applies to authors, editors, editorial board members, reviewers, and the publisher involved in the journal's editorial and publication processes.
The journal's publication ethics framework is informed by internationally recognised principles of responsible scholarly publishing, including the core practices promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
1. Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions are made on the basis of scholarly merit, relevance to the journal's aims and scope, methodological or theoretical quality, originality, research integrity, and the results of peer review.
Commercial considerations, institutional relationships, author identity, personal relationships, or other inappropriate influences must not determine editorial decisions.
The publisher supports editorial independence and does not interfere with individual manuscript decisions except where intervention is necessary to address legal, ethical, or research-integrity concerns.
2. Responsibilities of Authors
Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted manuscripts represent original scholarly work and accurately report the research or scholarly analysis undertaken.
Authors must:
- provide an accurate and honest account of the research;
- present sufficient information to allow readers to understand and evaluate the work;
- appropriately acknowledge all sources used;
- disclose relevant conflicts of interest;
- disclose sources of funding where applicable;
- comply with applicable ethical requirements;
- ensure that all listed authors meet appropriate authorship criteria;
- cooperate with editors regarding corrections, clarifications, or investigations when necessary.
Submission of fabricated, falsified, manipulated, plagiarised, or knowingly misleading material is unacceptable.
3. Originality and Plagiarism
Manuscripts must be original and must not contain plagiarism.
Authors must appropriately cite or acknowledge ideas, data, text, images, tables, instruments, or other material originating from other sources.
The journal may use similarity-detection software as part of editorial screening. Similarity percentages are interpreted by editors and are not used as the sole basis for determining plagiarism.
Suspected plagiarism, text recycling, inappropriate paraphrasing, or unattributed reuse will be evaluated according to the nature and extent of the concern.
4. Duplicate, Redundant, and Concurrent Publication
Authors must not submit substantially the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal.
Previously published material must not be presented as a new publication without appropriate justification, transparency, citation, and editorial approval.
Where a manuscript is based on, overlaps with, or extends previous work by the authors, the relationship between the works must be clearly disclosed.
Preprints, conference papers, theses, dissertations, institutional repositories, and other prior forms of dissemination should be disclosed where relevant so that the editor can determine whether the submission is eligible for consideration.
5. Authorship and Contributorship
Authorship should reflect substantial intellectual contribution to the work.
All listed authors should have made meaningful contributions to the conception, design, execution, analysis, interpretation, drafting, or substantive revision of the manuscript and should approve the final version.
Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.
Guest, honorary, purchased, or ghost authorship is unacceptable.
Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be accompanied by a clear explanation and may require written agreement from all affected contributors.
Where appropriate, the journal encourages the use of the CRediT taxonomy to describe contributor roles.
6. Conflicts of Interest and Competing Interests
Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members must disclose relationships or circumstances that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their judgment.
Potential conflicts may include financial, professional, institutional, personal, academic, or other competing interests.
Where an editor or editorial board member has a conflict of interest concerning a manuscript, that individual must not participate in its evaluation or editorial decision.
7. Research Ethics
Research involving human participants, personal data, vulnerable populations, or other ethically sensitive subjects must comply with applicable ethical standards and legal requirements.
Where ethical approval is required, authors should provide information concerning the approving institution or ethics committee and, where applicable, the relevant approval identifier.
Where informed consent is required, authors must confirm that appropriate consent has been obtained.
Research involving animals must comply with applicable institutional, national, and disciplinary standards.
If formal ethical approval is not applicable to a particular study, authors should provide an appropriate statement when requested by the journal.
8. Research Data and Reproducibility
Authors are expected to preserve research records appropriately and provide accurate information about data underlying the reported findings.
Where ethically, legally, and practically possible, authors are encouraged to make supporting data available through recognised repositories or other appropriate mechanisms.
Any restrictions on data availability should be explained transparently.
Fabrication, falsification, selective manipulation, or inappropriate alteration of research data is considered serious misconduct.
9. Responsibilities of Reviewers
Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, evidence-based, and respectful evaluations.
Reviewers must:
- treat manuscripts as confidential documents;
- disclose conflicts of interest;
- decline reviews for which they lack appropriate expertise;
- evaluate manuscripts fairly and independently;
- avoid personal criticism of authors;
- identify relevant published work that may have been overlooked;
- not use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.
Reviewer recommendations are advisory. Final editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the journal's editors.
10. Responsibilities of Editors
Editors are responsible for safeguarding the integrity and fairness of the editorial process.
Editors should:
- evaluate submissions according to scholarly merit;
- protect author and reviewer confidentiality;
- ensure appropriate peer review;
- manage conflicts of interest;
- respond appropriately to allegations of misconduct;
- consider corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions where required;
- ensure that editorial decisions are documented and made independently.
Editors must not use unpublished information obtained through submitted manuscripts for personal research or advantage without appropriate permission.
11. Allegations of Research or Publication Misconduct
The journal takes allegations of misconduct seriously whether concerns arise before or after publication.
Potential misconduct may include, but is not limited to:
- plagiarism;
- fabrication or falsification;
- manipulated or fraudulent data;
- duplicate publication;
- inappropriate authorship;
- undisclosed conflicts of interest;
- unethical research;
- peer-review manipulation;
- citation manipulation;
- deliberate misrepresentation;
- paper-mill activity;
- other conduct that undermines the integrity of the scholarly record.
When a credible concern is raised, the journal will conduct an initial assessment and may request clarification, documentation, raw data, ethical approval records, or other relevant information.
Where appropriate, the journal may contact an author's institution, research-integrity office, funder, ethics committee, or other competent body.
The journal will seek to act fairly and proportionately and will avoid making definitive allegations before sufficient information has been assessed.
12. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern
The journal is committed to maintaining an accurate scholarly record.
A correction may be issued when an error affects part of a publication but does not invalidate the work as a whole.
A retraction may be considered when findings are unreliable because of major error or misconduct, where substantial plagiarism or redundant publication has occurred, or where other serious integrity concerns invalidate the publication.
An expression of concern may be issued when significant concerns exist but an investigation has not yet reached a conclusive outcome.
Post-publication notices should be linked clearly to the affected article and should explain the reason for the editorial action as transparently as circumstances permit.
13. Complaints and Appeals
Authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders may raise concerns regarding editorial procedures, peer review, ethics, or published content.
Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a material error occurred in the evaluation of the manuscript.
An appeal should provide a clear scholarly or procedural justification rather than merely expressing disagreement with the decision.
Where practicable, complaints or appeals concerning an editor will be reviewed by another editor or an appropriate independent person who was not responsible for the original decision.
Appeals do not guarantee reversal of an editorial decision.
14. Confidentiality
Editors and reviewers must protect confidential information received through manuscript submission and peer review.
Unpublished manuscripts, reviewer reports, author correspondence, and confidential research data must not be disclosed or used improperly.
Information may be shared when necessary for legitimate investigation of research or publication misconduct.
15. Generative Artificial Intelligence and Automated Tools
The use of generative artificial intelligence and automated tools must comply with the journal's dedicated Generative AI Policy.
Automated tools cannot be credited as authors because they cannot assume responsibility for scholarly work.
Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, citations, interpretation, and integrity of submitted material.
Editors and reviewers must protect manuscript confidentiality when using digital or automated tools.
16. Editorial Board Submissions
Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial board members, reviewers, publisher representatives, or persons closely associated with the journal must be handled through an independent editorial process.
The submitting individual must not have access to or influence over reviewer selection, peer-review reports, or the final editorial decision concerning their own manuscript.
17. Special Issues and Guest Editors
Special issues and thematic collections are subject to the same standards of peer review, editorial independence, publication ethics, and research integrity as regular journal content.
The Editor-in-Chief retains overall responsibility for journal content.
Submissions authored by guest editors or individuals managing a special issue must be handled independently.
18. Post-Publication Responsibilities
Publication does not end the journal's responsibility for the scholarly record.
Credible concerns raised after publication will be assessed appropriately. Authors are expected to cooperate with reasonable editorial requests for clarification or correction.
Where necessary, the journal may publish corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other notices to preserve the reliability and transparency of the scholarly record.
19. Policy Review
ASLLE may revise this policy periodically in response to developments in publication ethics, scholarly communication, legal requirements, technological developments, or recognised international good practices.
Material changes should be reflected transparently on the journal website.
