Journal of Language Research (JLR) adheres to the COPE Code of Conduct and the COPE Guidelines on Best Practice for Journal Editors and the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers, as outlined at www.publicationethics.org.
For more information, click here: https://publicationethics.org/files/Code%20of%20Conduct_2.pdf and https://publicationethics.org/files/Code%20of%20conduct%20for%20publishers%20FINAL_1_0.pdf
Reporting standards
Manuscript authors must provide an accurate description of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Key data must be accurately represented in the manuscript. An article must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly false statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional journal articles must also be accurate and objective, and editorial “opinions” must be clearly identified as such.
Data Access and Storage
Authors may be asked to provide raw data associated with a manuscript for editorial review, and, if possible, should be prepared to provide general access to such data (in accordance with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) and to store such data for a reasonable period after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works and, when using the works and/or words of others, that these are properly cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, ranging from copying or paraphrasing significant portions of another article (without citation) to claiming the results of research conducted by others as one’s own. Plagiarism constitutes unethical publishing behavior of any kind and is unacceptable. Manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Language Research (JLR) are screened via intial.net.
Multiple, Unnecessary, or Simultaneous Publication
Generally, an author should not publish articles describing the same research in multiple journals or primary publications. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Generally, an author should not submit a previously published article for consideration in another journal. The publication of certain articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in multiple journals may sometimes be justified, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the relevant journals must agree to accept the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and the interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Citation of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of others’ work is always required. Authors should cite publications that were instrumental in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately—such as through conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties—should not be used or reported without written permission from the source. Information obtained during confidential services, such as manuscript rights or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written consent of the author of the work involved in such services.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials described in a submitted article must not be used in the reviewer’s own research without the author’s explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers must not consider manuscripts if they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscripts.
Review Process
Manuscripts submitted to the journal are evaluated by the journal editors within 2–4 weeks for compliance with publication policies, writing guidelines, and formatting requirements. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable are returned to the author with a reasoned decision. For suitable manuscripts, the peer review process is initiated as soon as possible. Each manuscript is shared with two reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. In necessary cases, the author(s) may be asked to suggest a reviewer. Reviewers are first contacted within a two-week period to confirm whether they will evaluate the work in question. Reviewers who express a willingness to review are asked to evaluate the submitted work within one month according to the specified criteria. A reminder is sent to reviewers whose evaluations are not completed within this timeframe. If the evaluation is not completed within the allotted time, the reviewer is replaced. The evaluation process is conducted in accordance with the double-blind peer review principle. Reviewers may not communicate directly with the authors; evaluations and review reports are transmitted via the journal’s management system.
During this process, evaluation forms and referee reports are forwarded to the author(s) via the editor. Manuscripts that receive negative reviews from two referees will not be published. For manuscripts that receive one negative and one positive review, the editorial board may review the referee reports and make the final decision, or request a third referee’s opinion. The decision regarding whether a manuscript will be published and in which issue is made by the Journal of Language Research (JLR) editorial board. Journal editors may make minor changes to the manuscript that do not affect its content when necessary.
Journal of Language Research (JLR) follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available on www.publicationethics.org
Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors
https://publicationethics.org/files/Code%20of%20Conduct_2.pdf
Code of Conduct for Publishers
https://publicationethics.org/files/Code%20of%20conduct%20for%20publishers%20FINAL_1_0.pdf