All individuals involved in scientific publishing in the KOLI Journal of English Language Education, including authors, editors, and reviewers, must adhere to the publication's ethical guidelines.

This ethical statement refers to the code of ethics followed by all individuals participating in the publication process of this scientific journal, including the author, editor, and reviewer. The main duty of this journal is to publish original work that is valuable to the intellectual community. We expect our reviewers and writers to uphold such standards. This ethical statement explains the ethical conduct expected from all parties engaged in publishing an article in this journal. This statement is derived from COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

 

Responsibilities of Authors

• Reporting Standards: Authors must provide a precise and unbiased summary of the original study conducted and an objective analysis of its importance. Researchers must report their findings with integrity, refraining from deception, distortion, or improper data manipulation. A manuscript should include ample specific information and citations to enable others to reproduce the research. Deliberately false or misleading statements are considered unethical and are not tolerated. Manuscripts must adhere to the submission standards specified by the publication.
• Authenticity and Plagiarism: Authors must guarantee they have produced unique content. Submitting the text to many publications simultaneously is not advisable unless the editors have consented to joint publication. It is important to acknowledge and reference relevant earlier work and publications by other researchers or authors. Whenever feasible, it is advisable to reference the original scientific literature. It is necessary to cite all quoted passages from other researchers' works.
• Multiple and Redundant Publications: Authors should avoid submitting the same work to many journals simultaneously. The author is also expected to refrain from publishing duplicate submissions or articles that describe the same research in multiple journals. Engaging in the simultaneous submission of a manuscript to various journals is considered unethical and is not tolerated in the publishing community. It is important to explicitly indicate when many publications come from the same research effort and to reference the main article.
• Acknowledgement: Authors must acknowledge all sources of data utilized in their research and include citations for publications that have significantly impacted the nature of the reported work. It is imperative always to provide appropriate recognition for the labour of others.
• Attribution of the Paper: The attribution of research publications should precisely reflect the contributions of persons to the study and its reporting. Authorship should only be granted to individuals who have contributed substantially to the study being reported's conception, design, implementation, or interpretation. Including other individuals who have made substantial contributions as co-authors is necessary when individuals who have made significant contributions are credited as authors. In contrast, those who have made less substantial or purely technical contributions to the research or publication are acknowledged separately. Authors verify that all co-authors have reviewed and consented to the submitted version of the work and their inclusion as co-authors.
• Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Authors are required to openly declare any financial or other significant conflicts of interest in their article that could potentially affect the results or interpretation of their work. Full transparency regarding all sources of financial assistance for the project is required.
• Errors in Published Works: If an author identifies a substantial error or inaccuracy in their submitted manuscript, they should promptly inform the journal editor or publisher and collaborate with the editor to retract or rectify the paper.

 

Responsibilities of Editor

• Publication Decisions: The editor can accept, reject, or propose amendments to the manuscript based on the review report from the editorial board. Determining the validity of the work in question and its significance to scholars and readers must consistently guide such decisions. The editorial board's policies guide the editors, who must also abide by current laws against libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may consult with other editors or reviewers when reaching this decision. Editors are accountable for the content they publish. They should establish protocols and guidelines to assure the excellence of the information they publish and uphold the integrity of the public record. The editor must evaluate each submission initially to confirm its uniqueness. The editor should effectively and judiciously implement the organization and utilization of peer review. Editors ought to elucidate their peer review procedures in the author guidelines and explicitly specify the sections of the publication that undergo peer review. Editors should employ suitable peer reviewers for manuscripts under consideration for publication by selecting individuals with ample competence and refraining from involving those with conflicts of interest.
• Equitable Treatment: The editor is responsible for ensuring that every manuscript submitted to the journal is evaluated based on its intellectual merit, regardless of the authors' sex, gender, colour, religion, citizenship, etc. Upholding the ideal of editorial independence and integrity is crucial for ensuring fair and unbiased decision-making. Editors wield significant influence through their decision-making authority in the publication process, underscoring the criticality of ensuring fairness and impartiality in this process.
• Confidentiality: The editor is responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of information related to manuscripts submitted by authors. Editors should rigorously evaluate any possible violations of data privacy and patient confidentiality. This entails obtaining fully informed consent for the actual study being presented and consent for publication if it is relevant.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The journal's editor will not utilize undisclosed materials from a submitted manuscript for personal research purposes without obtaining prior approval from the author. Editors must avoid making decisions about manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.

 

Responsibilities of Reviewer

• Confidentiality: Manuscripts submitted by writers must be kept confidential and considered as proprietary material. They are strictly prohibited from being displayed or talked about with anyone unless allowed by the editor.
• Acknowledgement: Reviewers must verify that the authors have properly acknowledged all data sources utilized in the research. Reviewers should ascertain pertinent literature that still needs to be referenced. Whenever claiming an observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously recorded, it is necessary to include the appropriate citation. Reviewers must promptly inform the journal if they encounter any irregularities, ethical concerns, significant similarities between the manuscript and another submission or published article, or suspicions of misconduct during the research or manuscript preparation. However, reviewers should maintain their anonymity and abstain from conducting personal investigations unless the journal specifically requests it for additional information or advice.
• The standards of objectivity require that submitted articles be examined unbiasedly. Reviewers should clearly articulate their opinions, providing well-founded arguments to support their views. Reviewers are expected to adhere to the instructions provided by journals regarding the precise input they need to deliver unless there are valid justifications for not doing so. The reviewers should offer constructive criticism in their evaluations and provide suggestions that will assist the authors in enhancing their articles. The reviewer should delineate between the additional investigations required to substantiate the claims made in the paper being evaluated and those that would merely enhance or expand upon the existing work.
• Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Maintaining confidentiality and refraining from using privileged information or ideas received through peer review for personal gain is important. Reviewers must avoid evaluating submissions if they have conflicts of interest arising from competing, collaborative, or other relationships or affiliations with any authors, companies, or institutions associated with the articles. In the context of a double-masked review, if the reviewers have suspicions about the identity of the author(s), they should promptly inform the journal if this awareness gives rise to any possible conflict of interest.
• Promptness: The reviewers should provide timely responses within a reasonable period. The reviewers will only accept reviewing an article if they are reasonably certain they can provide their evaluation within the suggested or mutually agreed-upon timeframe. They will quickly notify the journal if they need more time and request an extension. If a reviewer cannot complete the article review within the given time frame, they should contact the editor to assign the paper to another reviewer.