Publication Ethics and Integrity Policy

Commitment to Ethical Publishing

Applied Linguistics: Research, Measurement and Practice (ALRMP) is dedicated to maintaining the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing. The journal adheres to the principles set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and expects editors, authors, and reviewers to follow the same values of transparency, integrity, and fairness throughout the publication process.

This statement outlines the ethical framework that governs manuscript submission, peer review, and editorial decision-making at ALRMP.

1. Authors’ Responsibilities

1.1 Original Work and Plagiarism

Authors must submit only original research that has not been previously published or submitted elsewhere. Any form of plagiarism, including verbatim copying, close paraphrasing, self-plagiarism, or use of unacknowledged ideas, is unacceptable.
All submissions are screened using plagiarism-detection software (e.g., iThenticate). Manuscripts with significant similarity will be rejected or retracted if already published.

1.2 Authorship Criteria

Authorship should be restricted to individuals who have made meaningful scholarly contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All authors must:

  • Approve the submitted version of the manuscript.

  • Agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

Honorary, guest, or gift authorship is prohibited. Individuals who assisted with technical, financial, or administrative support should be recognised in the acknowledgements section.

1.3 Data Accuracy and Retention

Authors are responsible for the authenticity and accuracy of the data reported. Fabrication, falsification, or selective omission of data constitutes research misconduct.
Authors should retain original datasets for at least five years after publication and provide access upon reasonable request. When applicable, datasets should be archived in accessible repositories.

1.4 Duplicate and Multiple Submissions

Manuscripts must not be under review or published elsewhere at the time of submission to ALRMP. Simultaneous or duplicate submission is considered a serious ethical breach.

1.5 Conflicts of Interest

All financial or personal relationships that could influence the interpretation of the study must be declared. This includes funding sources, consultancy roles, institutional affiliations, or ownership of relevant intellectual property.
A disclosure statement must appear in the manuscript.

1.6 Acknowledgement of Sources

All sources that have shaped the study—conceptual frameworks, theoretical foundations, instruments, or data—must be properly cited. Failure to acknowledge prior scholarship constitutes unethical academic conduct.

1.7 Ethical Approval and Participant Consent

Studies involving human participants should comply with recognised ethical standards. Authors must:

  • Obtain approval from an institutional or national ethics committee.

  • Secure informed consent from participants (or guardians, when applicable).

  • Ensure confidentiality and anonymity of participant data.

The ethics approval number or statement must appear clearly in the methodology section.

2. Reviewers’ Responsibilities

Peer reviewers are integral to maintaining academic quality and must act with professionalism, fairness, and confidentiality.

  • Confidentiality: Review materials must not be shared or discussed with anyone outside the editorial process.

  • Objectivity: Reviews should be impartial, focusing on the scholarly quality of the manuscript rather than personal opinions about the authors or their institutions.

  • Constructive Feedback: Comments should be respectful, evidence-based, and aimed at improving clarity, coherence, and rigour.

  • Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should decline to assess any paper where a personal, financial, or professional relationship could bias their judgment.

  • Timeliness: Reviews should be completed within the timeframe agreed with the editor. If unable to meet the deadline, reviewers must inform the editorial office promptly.

3. Editors’ Responsibilities

Editors hold ultimate responsibility for maintaining the scientific and ethical integrity of ALRMP.

  • Editorial Independence: Decisions are based solely on the manuscript’s scholarly value and relevance to the journal’s aims, without discrimination based on nationality, gender, religion, or institutional affiliation.

  • Confidentiality: Editors must protect all information regarding submitted manuscripts and must not use unpublished material for personal advantage.

  • Fair Process: All manuscripts undergo fair and unbiased peer review. Conflicts of interest are avoided through transparent editorial procedures.

  • Dealing with Misconduct: When potential misconduct (plagiarism, data falsification, or unethical research) is suspected, editors follow COPE’s recommended flowcharts. Corrective actions may include rejection, correction, or retraction, and institutions may be notified where necessary.

4. Handling of Ethical Issues

ALRMP follows COPE guidelines when investigating allegations of research or publication misconduct.
Complaints may be raised by authors, reviewers, or readers, and all will be handled confidentially and fairly. Depending on the nature of the issue, outcomes may include:

  • Correction notices for minor errors.

  • Retractions for proven cases of falsification, plagiarism, or unethical practices.

  • Expressions of concern where suspicion exists but evidence is incomplete.

All corrections and retractions will be clearly linked to the original publication.

5. Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence

In alignment with the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) recommendations, ALRMP supports transparent and responsible use of AI tools in scholarly publishing.

  • Disclosure: Authors must explicitly state any use of AI tools—such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, or DeepL—for drafting, editing, translation, or analysis. This disclosure should appear in the acknowledgements or a footnote.

  • Authorship: AI systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. They do not fulfil authorship criteria or bear accountability for the content.

  • Human Oversight: All AI-assisted content must be critically reviewed and verified by human authors, who remain fully responsible for its accuracy and integrity.

  • Use in Peer Review: Reviewers must not share manuscripts with AI tools that store or transmit data externally. Any AI assistance in reviewing must comply with confidentiality and data protection principles.

  • Misuse: The use of AI to fabricate, manipulate, or plagiarise content will be treated as research misconduct and may result in retraction or permanent submission bans.

This policy will be periodically reviewed to reflect emerging technologies and ethical developments.

6. Upholding Ethical Culture

ALRMP aims to foster an environment of scholarly honesty, transparency, and accountability. Authors, reviewers, and editors share collective responsibility for maintaining these standards and for promoting responsible research practices across applied linguistics and educational sciences.