Publication Ethics
Publication Ethics
The Journal of Education, Language, and Cultural Studies (JELCS) is committed to maintaining high standards of academic integrity, transparency, and ethical publishing. The journal follows internationally recognised principles of publication ethics, including those established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors, editors, and reviewers are expected to uphold the following ethical responsibilities throughout the publication process.
1. Duties of Authors
1.1 Originality and Publication Status
Authors must ensure that their manuscripts represent original work that has not been previously published or submitted simultaneously to another journal. Any substantial overlap with previously published work must be appropriately acknowledged and disclosed.
1.2 Accuracy and Integrity of Research
Authors must present their research findings accurately, honestly, and objectively. Data fabrication, falsification, manipulation, and deliberate misrepresentation of research findings are strictly prohibited.
1.3 Acknowledgement of Sources
Authors must appropriately acknowledge the contributions of other researchers and provide accurate citations and references for all sources used. Plagiarism, including the unattributed reproduction of text, ideas, or research findings, is unacceptable.
1.4 Compliance with Submission Guidelines
Authors must prepare and submit manuscripts in accordance with the journal's submission guidelines, formatting requirements, and publication policies.
1.5 Authorship and Contributions
All listed authors must have made substantial contributions to the research and manuscript, approved the final version for publication, and agreed to take responsibility for their respective contributions. Individuals who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be appropriately acknowledged. Any changes to authorship must be justified and approved by all affected authors.
1.6 Funding and Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose all sources of financial support and any financial, professional, institutional, or personal relationships that could influence, or reasonably be perceived as influencing, the research process, interpretation of findings, or presentation of results.
1.7 Research Ethics and Informed Consent
Research involving human participants must comply with relevant ethical standards and institutional requirements. Where applicable, authors must obtain approval from an appropriate research ethics committee and secure informed consent from participants. Particular attention must be given to protecting the rights, privacy, confidentiality, and well-being of participants, especially children and vulnerable populations.
1.8 Data Integrity and Availability
Authors are responsible for maintaining the integrity of their research data and ensuring that their findings are supported by appropriate evidence. Where reasonably requested and ethically permissible, authors should provide relevant data or supporting documentation to facilitate editorial assessment or verification of research findings while protecting participant confidentiality.
1.9 Correction of Errors
Authors who identify significant errors or inaccuracies in their submitted or published work must promptly inform the journal's editors and cooperate in taking appropriate corrective action.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1 Academic Quality and Integrity
Editors are responsible for maintaining the academic quality, integrity, and credibility of the journal. They must ensure that manuscripts are evaluated according to established scholarly standards and the journal's aims and scope.
2.2 Fair and Objective Editorial Decisions
Editorial decisions must be based on scholarly merit, originality, relevance, methodological rigour, clarity, and compliance with the journal's policies. Decisions must not be influenced by authors' nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, institutional affiliation, political beliefs, or other irrelevant personal characteristics.
2.3 Confidentiality and AI Restrictions
Editors must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, author information, reviewer identities, and editorial communications in accordance with the journal's peer review policy. Manuscript information must not be disclosed to unauthorised individuals. Editors must not upload confidential manuscripts or related materials to generative AI platforms or use generative AI to make editorial decisions.
2.4 Conflicts of Interest and Editorial Independence
Editors must disclose and appropriately manage any conflicts of interest involving authors, reviewers, institutional colleagues, or other parties. Editors with conflicts of interest must withdraw from the editorial handling or decision-making process for the affected manuscript. Editorial decisions must remain independent of commercial, financial, institutional, or personal influences.
2.5 Plagiarism and Research Misconduct
Editors must take appropriate measures to identify and address suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, and other forms of research misconduct. When potential misconduct is identified, editors must investigate the matter fairly, seek clarification from the relevant parties where appropriate, and make decisions based on available evidence and the seriousness of the concern.
2.6 Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions
Editors are responsible for addressing credible concerns about published articles. When necessary, they must take appropriate action, including publishing corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions, in accordance with recognised publication ethics guidelines.
2.7 Complaints and Appeals
Editors must ensure that complaints and appeals concerning editorial decisions, peer review procedures, or publication ethics are handled fairly, consistently, and transparently. Authors and other relevant parties must be given an appropriate opportunity to provide clarification or supporting evidence.
2.8 Ethical Oversight
Editors must give appropriate consideration to ethical concerns involving human participants, informed consent, confidentiality, research integrity, and potential harm arising from published research. Where necessary, editors may request supporting documentation or seek further clarification from authors.
2.9 Continuous Quality Improvement
Editors must regularly review and improve the journal's editorial procedures, peer review practices, and publication policies to maintain academic quality, transparency, and relevance to developments in scholarly publishing.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1 Confidentiality
Reviewers must treat all manuscripts and related materials received for review as confidential documents. They must not disclose, distribute, reproduce, or discuss manuscript content with unauthorised individuals.
3.2 Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must promptly inform the editors of any financial, professional, institutional, or personal relationships that could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their impartiality. Reviewers should decline assignments when such conflicts cannot be appropriately managed.
3.3 Objective and Scholarly Evaluation
Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively and constructively, considering their originality, scholarly significance, theoretical contribution, methodological rigour, analytical depth, and clarity. Evaluations must be based on academic evidence rather than personal preferences or biases.
3.4 Identification of Ethical Concerns
Reviewers must promptly inform the editors if they identify suspected plagiarism, substantial duplication, data manipulation, unethical research practices, or other concerns affecting the integrity of a manuscript.
3.5 Timeliness and Professional Responsibility
Reviewers must complete their assessments within the timelines established by the journal. If they are unable to meet a deadline or lack the necessary expertise to evaluate a manuscript, they must inform the editors promptly.
3.6 Prohibition of Personal Gain
Reviewers must not use unpublished information, research findings, ideas, or materials obtained through the peer review process for personal, professional, or commercial advantage.
3.7 Constructive and Respectful Feedback
Reviewers must provide clear, constructive, respectful, and evidence-based feedback that assists authors in improving their manuscripts. Personal criticism, discriminatory comments, inappropriate language, and requests for unnecessary citations for personal benefit are unacceptable.
3.8 Prohibition of AI Use in Peer Review
Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading submitted manuscripts, in whole or in part, to generative AI platforms or using generative AI tools to evaluate manuscripts or generate, draft, revise, or otherwise prepare peer review comments. All reviews must be conducted independently and reflect the reviewer's own scholarly expertise, critical assessment, and professional judgement. Any violation of this policy may result in termination of the review assignment and removal from the journal's reviewer database.
4. Generative AI Policy for Authors
The Journal of Education, Language, and Cultural Studies (JELCS) recognises the increasing use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in academic research and writing. The journal permits the responsible use of AI-assisted tools by authors, provided that their use is transparent, ethical, and consistent with academic integrity.
4.1 Disclosure of AI Use
Authors must clearly disclose the use of generative AI tools in manuscript preparation, including the name of the tool, its version (where applicable), and the purpose and scope of its use. Routine spelling and grammar checking that does not involve substantive content generation does not normally require disclosure. Failure to provide appropriate disclosure may affect the review or publication status of the manuscript.
4.2 Authorship and Responsibility
Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. All authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and reliability of their manuscripts, including any content developed with AI assistance.
4.3 Restrictions on AI Use
Generative AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent research data or findings; generate fictitious references, citations, or sources; or produce an entire manuscript without meaningful scholarly contributions from the authors. Confidential information, personal data, and unpublished materials must not be entered into AI systems without appropriate authorisation and safeguards.
4.4 Policy Enforcement
The JELCS Editorial Board reserves the right to request further clarification regarding the use of generative AI at any stage of the editorial and peer review process. Non-compliance with this policy may result in requests for revision, rejection, or retraction, as appropriate, following editorial assessment.
4.5 Declaration of Generative AI Use
All submitted manuscripts must include a Declaration of Generative AI Use before the References section, regardless of whether generative AI tools were used. Authors who use generative AI must specify the name and version of the tool and the purpose and scope of its use. Authors who do not use generative AI must explicitly state this in their declaration.
Declaration Template (When AI Was Used)
During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of AI tool] (version) to [briefly describe the purpose and scope of use]. Following the use of this tool, the author(s) reviewed and revised the content as necessary and take full responsibility for the final content of the article.
Example 1: When AI Was Used
During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used ChatGPT (GPT-6) to improve the grammar, clarity, and readability of the English text in certain sections. Following the use of this tool, the authors reviewed and revised the content as necessary and take full responsibility for the final content of the article.
Example 2: When AI Was Not Used
The author(s) declare(s) that no generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools were used in the preparation of this manuscript.
Note: Authors should use “author declares” for single-author manuscripts and “authors declare” for multi-author manuscripts.
