Publication Ethics Statement | Journal of English and Applied Linguistics | DLSU Publications | De La Salle University
  •  
  •  
 

Publication Ethics Statement

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statements

The Journal of English and Applied Linguistics (a publication of De La Salle University Publishing House) promises to publish only works that passed our criteria for originality and integrity. The most-emphasized guidelines are listed below.

For Editors
  1. Ensure that published articles have gone through an unbiased review process by qualified scholars.
  2. Implement policies on authorship that encourage accuracy, accountability, integrity, and transparency (e.g., disclosure of the contribution of each author in the submitted work and declaration of competing interests). Ensure all research complies with ethical standards, including AI use and research involving human participants.
  3. Provide clear guidelines about the journal's expectations for the submitted works.
  4. Provide guidelines for the effective review process.
  5. Require authors to disclose conflict of interests.
  6. Require reviewers to declare a possible conflict of interest.
  7. Provide policies for retraction.
  8. Ensure that the submission and reviews remain confidential. Only the corresponding author, editors, reviewers, and publisher know the manuscript and pre-publication processes.
  9. Provide guidelines regarding AI use in research and obtaining necessary approvals and consent for research involving human participants.
For Authors
  1. Only individuals who have made a significant contribution in the article and can take full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the work should be credited with authorship. Authors must list co-authors who have a significant contribution in at least three of the following steps: conceptualization, data collection, data analysis, report writing, revising, and approval of the final draft of the written work.
  2. Authors must not submit work that used a Generative AI to generate content including text, figures, and images. Assistive tools like Grammarly are allowed but must be disclosed. AI tools cannot be given authorship roles. AI tools used in thematic analysis are allowed on the condition that cross-validation by human coders was made. These tools should be described in the methods section.
  3. Authors are to reference all borrowed material from published and unpublished sources. Borrowed non-prose materials or texts with large amounts of borrowed material are to be used with written permission from the creators/owners.
  4. Authors should not submit an article that is under review in another journal.
  5. Corresponding authors take full responsibility for communicating with the journal during the submission, peer-review, and publication processes. They are to declare the role of each author in the submitted work.
  6. Authors must secure informed consent or ethics clearance for work that involves human participants.
  7. Authors agree to comply with the journal's policies on copyright, declaration of conflict of interest, AI use, and similarity checks.
  8. Authors agree that this journal will retract papers with clear evidence of unreliable, falsified, fabricated, plagiarized, unauthorized, or infringed use of data, or papers that have been published as a result of manipulation and compromise during the review process.
  9. Authors must immediately inform the journal editors and work with them to amend or withdraw the paper when significant mistakes or errors are identified in published articles.
  10. Authors who engage in unethical research and publishing will be blacklisted from the journal after a fair investigation.
For Reviewers:

Peer review, which is at the center of scholarly publishing and the scientific process, aims to improve the paper submission so that it becomes a credible resource in knowledge creation. Reviewers are expected to:

  1. Decline if they are unable to return the review on time, if they lack the subject expertise needed to provide quality review, if they have potentially competing interests, and if they are working on a similar manuscript.
  2. Ensure the confidentiality of the manuscript and review details.
  3. Never use the unpublished information or data from the reviewed manuscript for their research/gain.
  4. Be timely in returning the review.
  5. Never contact the authors without permission from the editor.
  6. Aim to help authors to improve the article by giving objective and constructive reviews with supporting arguments.
  7. Avoid making unfair remarks that denigrate the author's intellectual and research capabilities.
  8. Be willing to accommodate requests for another round of review.
  9. Be alert about AI-generated content in the reviewed manuscript. Asking AI to give feedback on the reviewed article is not allowed.
  10. Ensure that research involving human participants is conducted ethically by looking for statements confirming that informed consent was sought or ethics clearance has been obtained prior to data collection.

Publisher's Confirmation

In instances of ethical breaches, JEAL Editors, in collaboration with the DLSU-PH, will address and correct the article. This may involve issuing an erratum, providing clarification, or retracting the publication if necessary. They will also implement measures to prevent and deter research misconduct.

References:

COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. https://publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf

COPE Discussion Document: Authorship. https://publicationethics.org/files/COPE_DD_A4_Authorship_SEPT19_SCREEN_AW.pdf

COPE Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers (English). https://publicationethics.org/node/19886