JOURNAL INFORMATION
FOR AUTHORS
EDITORIAL AND PUBLICATION POLICIES
RESEARCH INTEGRITY
CONTACT AND COLLABORATION
PUBLICATION ETHICS
JOLLT Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, published by Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika (UNDIKMA), Indonesia, is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, research integrity, editorial independence, transparency, and accountability in scholarly communication.
The journal recognizes that ethical publishing requires shared responsibilities among authors, editors, peer reviewers, the publisher, and other parties involved in the publication process. These responsibilities extend from manuscript submission and peer review to publication, post-publication discussion, correction, and the long-term preservation of the scholarly record.
JOLLT's editorial policies are informed by the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and internationally recognized standards of transparency and responsible scholarly publishing.
This policy establishes the ethical responsibilities of publishing participants and explains the journal's procedures for addressing allegations of research misconduct, conflicts of interest, research ethics, post-publication discussion, corrections, retractions, complaints, and editorial appeals.
JOLLT'S COMMITMENT TO PUBLICATION ETHICS
JOLLT is committed to ensuring that scholarly publication decisions are based on academic merit, methodological rigor, originality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's focus and scope.
The journal does not tolerate plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, compromised peer review, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other forms of serious publication misconduct.
Ethical concerns are addressed through fair, confidential, evidence-based procedures that respect the rights and responsibilities of all relevant parties.
PUBLICATION ETHICS AT A GLANCE
The following table summarizes the principal components of JOLLT's publication ethics framework.
| Ethical Component | Journal Policy |
|---|---|
| Ethical Standards | Principles informed by COPE and recognized scholarly publishing practices |
| Author Responsibilities | Originality, accurate reporting, authorship accountability, ethical compliance, and disclosure |
| Editorial Responsibilities | Independent decisions, impartial assessment, confidentiality, and research integrity |
| Reviewer Responsibilities | Objective evaluation, confidentiality, professional conduct, and conflict disclosure |
| Publisher Responsibilities | Institutional support, editorial independence, publication integrity, and record preservation |
| Research Misconduct | Evidence-based assessment, author response, further investigation, and appropriate editorial action |
| Conflicts of Interest | Disclosure and management of financial and non-financial competing interests |
| Research Ethics | Ethical approval or exemption, informed consent, confidentiality, and responsible data management |
| Post-Publication Discussion | Scholarly correspondence, methodological criticism, author responses, and editorial assessment |
| Corrections and Retractions | Transparent correction of the scholarly record, expressions of concern, and retraction procedures |
| Complaints and Appeals | Documented procedures for submitting and evaluating editorial concerns |
| Artificial Intelligence | Responsible use, disclosure, human accountability, and confidentiality |
QUICK NAVIGATION
The following links provide direct access to the main sections of JOLLT's publication ethics and editorial policies.
1. GENERAL ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
JOLLT considers research and publication integrity fundamental to the credibility, reliability, and advancement of scholarly knowledge. All participants in the publication process are expected to uphold principles of honesty, accountability, transparency, fairness, confidentiality, and respect for intellectual contributions.
The journal applies the following general ethical principles:
- Research Integrity: Research must be conducted, analyzed, and reported honestly, accurately, and responsibly.
- Scholarly Originality: Submitted manuscripts must represent original contributions and appropriately acknowledge relevant previous scholarship.
- Editorial Independence: Editorial decisions must be based on scholarly considerations and remain independent of inappropriate financial, institutional, personal, or political influence.
- Impartial Evaluation: Manuscripts must be assessed fairly without discrimination based on authors' personal characteristics, institutional status, nationality, or other irrelevant considerations.
- Confidentiality: Unpublished manuscripts, peer review reports, editorial communications, and sensitive research information must be handled responsibly.
- Transparency: Relevant publishing policies, authorship requirements, fees, licensing conditions, and editorial procedures must be clearly communicated.
- Accountability: Authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher must accept responsibility for their respective roles.
- Correction of the Scholarly Record: Substantial errors, unreliable findings, and publication-integrity concerns must be addressed through appropriate editorial procedures.
These principles apply throughout the manuscript submission, editorial screening, peer review, production, publication, and post-publication stages.
2. ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS
Authors submitting manuscripts to JOLLT are expected to uphold high standards of research integrity and comply with the journal's authorship, originality, ethical oversight, and publication policies.
All listed authors share responsibility for ensuring that their manuscript accurately represents the research conducted and that relevant scholarly contributions are appropriately acknowledged.
2.1. Originality and Accurate Reporting
Authors must submit original scholarly work that has not been published elsewhere in substantially the same form without appropriate disclosure or authorization.
Research findings must be reported honestly and accurately. Authors must not fabricate data, falsify results, manipulate evidence, selectively omit material findings in a misleading manner, or misrepresent research procedures.
Relevant previous studies must be appropriately cited. Direct quotations, paraphrased ideas, adapted figures, research instruments, and other intellectual materials must receive proper acknowledgment.
Authors must comply with the journal's Screening for Plagiarism and Originality Policy.
2.2. Authorship and Contributorship
Authorship must reflect substantial intellectual contributions and scholarly accountability.
Individuals who have not made contributions sufficient to meet the journal's authorship criteria must not be listed as authors solely because of academic rank, institutional position, financial support, administrative involvement, or personal relationships.
All listed authors must approve the submitted manuscript and accept accountability for its accuracy and integrity.
Contributions that do not satisfy the authorship criteria should be recognized in the Acknowledgments section where appropriate.
Gift authorship, guest authorship, ghost authorship, and the deliberate exclusion of eligible contributors are unacceptable.
2.3. Changes in Authorship
The authorship list and author order should be agreed upon before manuscript submission.
Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must include a written explanation, supporting information where necessary, and confirmation from all affected authors.
Such requests are subject to editorial evaluation and must not be implemented unilaterally. Where authorship disputes cannot be resolved through appropriate documentation, the editorial office may refer the matter to the relevant institution.
2.4. Multiple Submission and Duplicate Publication
Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals.
A manuscript may be submitted to another journal only after its consideration by the previous journal has formally ended.
Authors must disclose relevant previous dissemination, including preprints, theses, dissertations, conference proceedings, and related publications, when necessary to assess originality or potential overlap.
Previous dissemination does not automatically constitute duplicate publication. The editorial team evaluates the nature and extent of overlap and the adequacy of disclosure.
2.5. Research Data and Supporting Information
Authors must maintain accurate research records and provide sufficient information to support evaluation of their findings.
During editorial assessment or peer review, authors may be asked to provide relevant supporting materials, research instruments, analytical procedures, anonymized data, or other documentation necessary to clarify the reported research.
Requests for data must respect applicable confidentiality, participant consent, copyright, institutional, and legal restrictions.
Authors must not disclose identifiable or confidential participant information without an appropriate legal and ethical basis.
2.6. Research Ethics and Participant Consent
Authors conducting research involving human participants must comply with relevant institutional and disciplinary ethical requirements.
Where applicable, authors must obtain ethical approval or an appropriate exemption and document informed consent procedures before conducting the research.
Research involving children or vulnerable populations must address relevant guardian permissions, participant assent, and additional safeguards where required.
Authors must ensure that participant identities, personal information, research recordings, interview transcripts, and other potentially sensitive materials are appropriately protected.
2.7. Conflicts of Interest and Funding
Authors must disclose relevant financial and non-financial relationships that could reasonably be perceived to influence the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, or publication of their research.
Relevant funding sources and the role of funders must be accurately identified.
Failure to disclose material competing interests may result in editorial investigation and appropriate action under the journal's policies.
2.8. Correction of Errors
Authors who identify substantial errors, inaccuracies, or ethical concerns in their submitted, accepted, or published work must promptly inform the editorial office.
Authors are expected to cooperate with editors in evaluating and correcting the scholarly record, including the publication of corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions when warranted.
Further authorship and manuscript preparation requirements are provided in the journal's Author Guidelines.
3. ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF EDITORS
The Editor in Chief, handling editors, and other authorized editorial personnel are responsible for maintaining the integrity, fairness, confidentiality, and scholarly quality of the journal's editorial decision-making process.
3.1. Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions must be based on scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, relevance, and ethical compliance.
Editors must not allow inappropriate financial, institutional, personal, commercial, or political interests to determine whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected.
Payment of article processing charges, eligibility for fee exemptions, or an author's institutional affiliation must not influence scholarly evaluation or publication decisions.
3.2. Fair and Impartial Evaluation
Editors must evaluate manuscripts fairly and apply consistent editorial standards.
Editorial decisions must not discriminate based on authors' nationality, gender, ethnicity, religion, institutional affiliation, or other characteristics unrelated to the scholarly content of the manuscript.
Editors should provide reasoned decisions based on relevant manuscript quality, peer review findings, and editorial assessment.
3.3. Confidentiality
Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewer identities where applicable, editorial correspondence, and other unpublished scholarly information.
Information concerning submitted manuscripts must not be disclosed to unauthorized parties or used for personal research or professional advantage.
3.4. Selection and Management of Reviewers
Editors must select reviewers with appropriate expertise and seek independent, constructive, and academically relevant evaluations.
Editors must consider reviewer availability, potential conflicts of interest, and the need for impartial assessment.
Reviewer recommendations inform editorial decisions but do not automatically determine acceptance or rejection.
3.5. Editorial Conflicts of Interest
Editors must disclose circumstances that may compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their impartiality.
When an editor has a relevant conflict of interest, the manuscript must be reassigned to an appropriately qualified editor who can manage the evaluation independently.
Manuscripts submitted by members of the editorial board or individuals closely associated with the journal must receive independent editorial handling and appropriate peer review.
3.6. Research Integrity and Editorial Corrections
Editors must respond appropriately to credible concerns involving plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, inappropriate authorship, compromised peer review, citation manipulation, or other potential breaches of publication integrity.
When necessary, editors may seek explanations, supporting documentation, independent expert opinions, or assistance from the relevant research institution.
Editors are responsible for determining appropriate editorial action, including corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions when justified.
4. ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF REVIEWERS AND PUBLISHER
Peer reviewers play an important role in maintaining the scholarly quality, validity, relevance, and integrity of manuscripts considered for publication in JOLLT.
Reviewers are expected to conduct their evaluations objectively, professionally, constructively, and confidentially.
4.1. Objectivity and Professional Conduct
Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts on their scholarly merit, methodological adequacy, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal.
Review comments should be constructive, evidence-based, respectful, and sufficiently specific to support editorial decision-making and manuscript improvement.
Personal criticism, discriminatory statements, inappropriate language, and recommendations unsupported by scholarly reasoning are unacceptable.
4.2. Reviewer Confidentiality
Reviewers must treat manuscripts and related editorial materials as confidential information.
Unpublished data, ideas, findings, and other content obtained through peer review must not be disclosed or used for personal or professional advantage.
Reviewers must not share manuscripts with unauthorized individuals or external services without editorial permission.
4.3. Reviewer Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must disclose potential financial, institutional, professional, or personal conflicts that could affect their impartiality.
Reviewers should decline or withdraw from assignments when they cannot provide an independent and objective assessment.
Potential conflicts must be communicated promptly to the handling editor.
4.4. Competence and Timeliness
Reviewers should accept assignments only when they possess sufficient expertise to evaluate the relevant subject and methodology.
Reviewers who are unable to complete an appropriate assessment within the agreed period should inform the editorial office promptly.
4.5. Identification of Ethical Concerns
Reviewers should notify the editor when they identify credible concerns about possible plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, inappropriate attribution, ethical approval, or other matters affecting research integrity.
Such concerns should be communicated confidentially and supported by relevant evidence where possible.
Reviewers must not independently contact authors or their institutions to investigate suspected misconduct unless specifically authorized by the editor.
4.6. Publisher Responsibilities
Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika (UNDIKMA), as the publisher of JOLLT, is responsible for supporting ethical and transparent scholarly publishing practices.
The publisher's responsibilities include:
- Supporting editorial independence and responsible journal governance.
- Providing appropriate institutional and technical support for journal operations.
- Supporting the implementation of publication ethics policies.
- Cooperating with editors in addressing serious publication-integrity concerns.
- Supporting the maintenance and preservation of accurate publication records.
- Ensuring that financial or administrative interests do not improperly influence scholarly decisions.
5. ALLEGATIONS OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT
JOLLT takes seriously allegations of research misconduct that may arise before or after publication.
The journal follows fair, confidential, and evidence-based procedures when assessing concerns concerning the reliability, originality, attribution, or ethical conduct of scholarly work.
RESEARCH MISCONDUCT POLICY
Credible allegations of research misconduct are evaluated through documented editorial procedures. The journal seeks relevant evidence, provides affected parties with an appropriate opportunity to respond, manages conflicts of interest, and determines suitable editorial action.
When allegations require formal investigation beyond the journal's authority or expertise, the relevant research institution or responsible organization may be contacted.
5.1. Types of Research and Publication Misconduct
Research and publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to, the following practices.
| Type of Misconduct | Description |
|---|---|
| Fabrication | Inventing research data, observations, participants, findings, or results that were not genuinely obtained. |
| Falsification | Manipulating research materials, procedures, data, or findings in ways that misrepresent the research. |
| Plagiarism | Presenting another person's intellectual contributions, text, data, or materials without appropriate acknowledgment. |
| Duplicate Publication | Publishing substantially overlapping work without appropriate disclosure or legitimate scholarly justification. |
| Authorship Misconduct | Guest authorship, ghost authorship, unauthorized authorship changes, or deliberate misrepresentation of contributions. |
| Citation Manipulation | Using irrelevant or coercive citations to improperly influence citation metrics or create misleading scholarly attribution. |
| Peer Review Manipulation | Providing false reviewer identities, compromising review confidentiality, or attempting to interfere improperly with reviewer recommendations. |
| Ethical Misrepresentation | Providing false or misleading statements regarding ethical approval, participant consent, funding, or competing interests. |
5.2. Submission of Allegations
Concerns about suspected research misconduct may be submitted to the editorial office by authors, reviewers, readers, research institutions, or other individuals with relevant information.
Allegations should identify the manuscript or published article, describe the specific concern, and provide supporting evidence or references where available.
JOLLT may also assess concerns raised anonymously when sufficient and credible information is available to support meaningful examination.
Allegations should be submitted through the journal's official editorial contact.
5.3. Preliminary Assessment
Upon receiving a credible allegation, the Editor in Chief or an appropriately designated editor conducts a preliminary assessment.
The assessment determines the nature of the concern, whether the available evidence warrants further examination, and whether the responsible editor has a relevant conflict of interest.
Relevant records and supporting materials should be preserved as appropriate.
5.4. Author Response and Evidence Collection
When substantive allegations require clarification, the relevant author or authors should be given a reasonable opportunity to respond.
The editorial office may request original data, research documentation, ethical approval records, authorship declarations, or other information relevant to the concern.
Responses are evaluated according to their relevance, completeness, and supporting evidence.
5.5. Institutional Investigation
When allegations involve matters requiring formal investigation, including serious concerns about data fabrication, falsification, research conduct, or institutional ethical approval, the editorial office may refer the matter to the responsible research institution.
JOLLT may cooperate with institutional investigations while retaining responsibility for decisions affecting its own publication record.
The journal does not assume the authority to make institutional disciplinary determinations.
5.6. Editorial Outcomes
Depending on the findings, the editorial office may:
- Close the matter when the evidence does not support further action.
- Request clarification or manuscript correction.
- Suspend editorial consideration while substantive concerns are examined.
- Reject a submitted manuscript when serious ethical violations are established.
- Publish a correction to an article when the error can be resolved without invalidating the principal findings.
- Publish an expression of concern when substantial unresolved questions warrant informing readers.
- Retract an article when its findings are unreliable or serious publication-integrity concerns justify retraction.
- Refer relevant concerns to an institution or other responsible organization.
Editorial actions must be proportionate to the documented evidence and the potential effects on the reliability and integrity of the scholarly record.
5.7. Confidentiality and Protection of Complainants
Allegations are handled with appropriate confidentiality and professional discretion.
The identity of individuals raising concerns should not be disclosed unnecessarily. However, absolute anonymity cannot be guaranteed where disclosure is required by law, due process, or a necessary investigation.
JOLLT does not tolerate intimidation or retaliation arising from good-faith reporting of credible research-integrity concerns.
6. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND COMPETING INTERESTS
JOLLT requires the disclosure and appropriate management of financial and non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived to influence research conduct, manuscript evaluation, editorial decisions, or scholarly publication.
A conflict of interest does not automatically indicate misconduct. However, undisclosed or unmanaged conflicts may undermine confidence in the independence and integrity of the publication process.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST PRINCIPLE
Authors, reviewers, editors, and other relevant publishing personnel must disclose actual, potential, or reasonably perceived conflicts of interest.
Where a conflict may compromise impartiality, appropriate management measures must be implemented, including reassignment, independent assessment, or withdrawal from the relevant editorial responsibility.
6.1. Types of Conflicts of Interest
| Conflict Category | Examples |
|---|---|
| Financial | Research funding, consultancy, employment, paid advisory roles, commercial interests, or other relevant financial relationships. |
| Institutional | Organizational relationships or institutional responsibilities that may influence independent evaluation. |
| Professional | Recent collaborations, supervisory relationships, academic competition, or other relevant professional associations. |
| Personal | Family relationships, close personal associations, or interpersonal circumstances that may compromise impartiality. |
| Academic | Professional rivalries or interests that could improperly influence evaluation or publication decisions. |
6.2. Authors' Conflict of Interest Disclosure
All authors must disclose relevant financial and non-financial competing interests when submitting their manuscripts.
Authors must identify interests that could reasonably be perceived to affect the conduct, analysis, interpretation, or reporting of the research.
When no relevant conflicts exist, the following declaration may be used:
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest related to this research.
6.3. Reviewers' Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Reviewers must disclose potential competing interests before accepting an assignment and must promptly notify the editor if a relevant conflict becomes apparent during the review process.
Reviewers must decline or withdraw from assignments when a conflict prevents objective evaluation.
6.4. Editors' Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Editors must disclose relationships or interests that may affect the impartial handling of a manuscript.
Where a relevant conflict exists, the editor must recuse themselves from the manuscript's evaluation and decision-making process.
The Editor in Chief or another authorized editor must assign the manuscript to an independent handling editor.
6.5. Manuscripts Submitted by Editorial Board Members
Manuscripts submitted by members of JOLLT's editorial board may be considered for publication when they satisfy the same scholarly and ethical requirements applied to other submissions.
However, an editor who is an author or has a relevant relationship with the authors must not manage the manuscript's review or make its publication decision.
Such manuscripts must receive independent editorial handling and appropriate peer review.
6.6. Publisher and Financial Independence
Financial arrangements, article processing charges, fee exemptions, institutional affiliations, and publisher interests must not improperly influence editorial decisions.
Publication decisions must remain based on scholarly merit, quality of evidence, and ethical compliance.
6.7. Conflicts Discovered After Publication
When previously undisclosed competing interests are identified after publication, the editorial office evaluates their significance and possible effects on the published record.
Where necessary, the journal may request clarification, publish a correction to the disclosure statement, or initiate further investigation if the concern affects the reliability or integrity of the research.
7. RESEARCH ETHICS, INFORMED CONSENT, AND DATA INTEGRITY
JOLLT requires authors to conduct and report research in accordance with applicable ethical standards, institutional requirements, and relevant laws and regulations.
Because the journal publishes research in language teaching, linguistics, and related fields, ethical considerations may involve students, teachers, educational institutions, interview participants, classroom interactions, written responses, audio recordings, video recordings, and linguistic datasets.
7.1. Ethical Approval and Exemptions
Authors must obtain ethical review or approval when required by the responsible institution or applicable regulations.
Where formal approval is not required, authors should provide an appropriate explanation or declaration of exemption when relevant.
Ethical approval must not be fabricated, misrepresented, or reported inaccurately.
7.2. Informed Consent
Researchers must obtain informed consent when required for the collection, analysis, or publication of information involving human participants.
Participants should receive relevant information about the research purpose, procedures, foreseeable risks, confidentiality arrangements, and their rights under the applicable ethical framework.
7.3. Research Involving Minors or Vulnerable Participants
Studies involving children or vulnerable participants must implement appropriate safeguards.
Guardian permission, participant assent, institutional authorization, and other protective measures must be obtained when required.
7.4. Privacy and Confidentiality
Authors must protect personally identifiable information and sensitive research data.
Participant names, student records, interview recordings, classroom materials, and other potentially identifying information must be managed in accordance with relevant consent arrangements and data protection requirements.
7.5. Data Integrity and Reproducibility
Authors must report research procedures, analytical methods, and findings accurately and transparently.
Where ethically and legally permissible, authors are encouraged to make anonymized datasets, research instruments, protocols, or analytical materials available to support verification and reproducibility.
Data availability restrictions must be clearly explained when relevant.
8. RESPONSIBLE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
JOLLT recognizes that artificial intelligence technologies may support certain research and manuscript preparation activities. However, the use of AI must not compromise originality, scholarly responsibility, confidentiality, or the reliability of published research.
8.1. AI Use by Authors
Authors must disclose substantive use of generative artificial intelligence or AI-assisted tools in manuscript preparation, content generation, translation, coding, data analysis, image generation, or other research-related activities.
The declaration should identify the tool used, its purpose, the nature of its contribution, and the procedures undertaken to verify the resulting content.
AI systems must not be listed as authors because they cannot accept responsibility or accountability for scholarly publications.
8.2. Human Accountability
Human authors remain responsible for all manuscript content, including AI-assisted text, references, analyses, research data, figures, interpretations, and conclusions.
Fabricated citations, manipulated evidence, unsupported findings, and misleading representations remain unacceptable regardless of whether they originate from an AI system or other source.
8.3. AI Use by Editors and Reviewers
Editors and reviewers must protect the confidentiality of unpublished manuscripts and editorial communications.
Confidential manuscript content, reviewer reports, or unpublished research data must not be uploaded to external AI services without appropriate authorization and safeguards.
Editorial decisions and peer review judgments must remain the responsibility of qualified human editors and reviewers.
9. POST-PUBLICATION DISCUSSION AND SCHOLARLY CORRESPONDENCE
JOLLT recognizes that scholarly evaluation and scientific discussion may continue after an article has been published.
Post-publication discussion contributes to the advancement of knowledge by allowing readers, researchers, and authors to question interpretations, clarify methods, examine evidence, and discuss the implications of published findings.
POST-PUBLICATION DISCUSSION POLICY
JOLLT welcomes evidence-based scholarly comments, constructive criticism, methodological questions, and requests for clarification concerning published articles.
Post-publication correspondence is evaluated by the editorial office. When appropriate, the journal may invite responses from the original authors and facilitate scholarly exchange through suitable editorial or publication mechanisms.
9.1. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion
Post-publication discussion may address:
- Research methodology and analytical procedures.
- Interpretation of research findings.
- Alternative theoretical explanations.
- Limitations or uncertainties in the reported evidence.
- Possible errors requiring clarification or correction.
- Questions concerning the reproducibility or transparency of research procedures.
- Other substantive scholarly issues relevant to the published article.
9.2. Submission of Scholarly Comments
Readers and researchers may submit scholarly correspondence to the editorial office through the journal's official contact information.
Correspondence should identify the relevant published article, describe the issue or question clearly, and provide appropriate scholarly evidence or references where necessary.
Comments must be presented professionally and must not contain personal attacks, discriminatory language, unsupported allegations, or confidential information disclosed without authorization.
9.3. Editorial Assessment of Comments
The editorial team evaluates whether submitted correspondence raises a relevant and substantive scholarly issue.
Comments that contribute to academic debate may be considered for an appropriate editorial response or public scholarly exchange.
Comments identifying potential factual errors or research-integrity concerns are evaluated under the relevant correction or misconduct procedures.
9.4. Authors' Right of Response
When appropriate, the editorial office may invite the authors of the published article to respond to substantive scholarly criticism or requests for clarification.
Author responses should address the issues raised accurately, respectfully, and with appropriate scholarly evidence.
The editorial team may evaluate the correspondence and author response before determining whether public dissemination is appropriate.
9.5. Publication of Scholarly Correspondence
Where justified, JOLLT may facilitate the public dissemination of substantive scholarly correspondence and author responses through an appropriate journal communication mechanism.
Such correspondence is subject to editorial assessment and does not automatically constitute a new peer-reviewed research article.
The editorial office determines the appropriate form of publication or communication consistent with the journal's policies and available publication mechanisms.
9.6. Distinction Between Debate and Misconduct
Differences in scholarly interpretation do not automatically indicate research misconduct.
Legitimate academic disagreement should be addressed through evidence-based discussion.
When concerns involve potentially unreliable findings, falsified data, plagiarism, or other serious ethical violations, the matter is referred to the journal's research misconduct procedures.
10. CORRECTIONS, EXPRESSIONS OF CONCERN, AND RETRACTIONS
JOLLT is committed to maintaining an accurate, reliable, and transparent scholarly record.
When significant errors, unreliable findings, or publication-integrity concerns are identified after publication, the journal evaluates the available evidence and applies an appropriate editorial response.
The purpose of post-publication editorial action is to correct and protect the scholarly record, not to impose punishment on authors.
CORRECTION AND RETRACTION PRINCIPLE
Published articles must not be silently modified, withdrawn, or deleted to conceal substantial errors or ethical concerns.
Corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions should be clearly identified, publicly accessible, and appropriately linked to the original publication record.
10.1. Types of Post-Publication Editorial Actions
| Editorial Action | Purpose and Application |
|---|---|
| Minor Correction | Addresses limited factual, textual, or bibliographic errors that do not materially alter the principal findings. |
| Substantive Correction | Corrects important errors when the principal findings and conclusions remain sufficiently reliable. |
| Expression of Concern | Alerts readers to serious unresolved questions concerning the reliability or integrity of a published article. |
| Retraction | Identifies a published article whose findings or publication record are sufficiently unreliable or compromised to warrant formal retraction. |
10.2. Corrections
A correction may be published when an error affects a published article but does not invalidate its principal findings or conclusions.
Errors requiring correction may include:
- Incorrect numerical values or statistical results that do not invalidate the principal conclusions.
- Errors in tables, figures, labels, or explanatory text.
- Materially inaccurate bibliographic or publication information.
- Incorrect author information requiring formal amendment.
- Missing or inaccurate acknowledgments, funding information, or conflict of interest disclosures.
- Other substantive errors that can be corrected without invalidating the main scholarly contribution.
The correction notice should identify the original article, explain the error, and clearly describe the correction made.
Where a correction is necessary, the article and correction notice should be linked appropriately.
10.3. Expressions of Concern
An expression of concern may be issued when credible and serious questions about the reliability or integrity of an article remain unresolved.
Such circumstances may include ongoing investigations, inconclusive evidence concerning serious allegations, or prolonged inability to obtain information necessary to determine whether the publication can be relied upon.
An expression of concern is intended to inform readers about unresolved issues. It does not constitute a definitive finding of misconduct or serve as a substitute for a retraction when retraction is clearly warranted.
The notice should describe the nature of the concern without making unsupported allegations.
10.4. Grounds for Retraction
Retraction may be considered when substantial evidence demonstrates that the findings or conclusions are unreliable or that serious publication-integrity problems compromise the published scholarly record.
Relevant circumstances may include:
- Unreliable findings resulting from major analytical, methodological, or reporting errors.
- Fabricated or falsified research data.
- Substantial plagiarism or unauthorized reproduction of previously published scholarly work.
- Serious redundant or duplicate publication without appropriate disclosure or justification.
- Compromised or manipulated peer review that undermines confidence in the publication.
- Serious ethical violations affecting the legitimacy or integrity of the research.
- Other circumstances in which the editorial office can no longer have sufficient confidence in the reliability of the published findings.
Retraction decisions must be proportionate to the evidence and consistent with recognized publication ethics guidance.
10.5. Retraction Investigation and Decision
Before issuing a retraction, the editorial office evaluates the available evidence and seeks relevant clarification from the authors or other responsible parties where appropriate.
The journal may consult independent experts, the publisher, or the authors' institutions when necessary.
The Editor in Chief or an appropriately designated independent editor retains responsibility for the final editorial decision affecting the publication record.
The journal may proceed with an appropriate retraction even when the authors do not agree, provided that the decision is supported by sufficient evidence and proper editorial procedures.
10.6. Retraction Notice and Publication Record
A retraction notice must clearly identify the affected article and provide a transparent explanation of the reason for retraction.
The notice should include:
- A clearly identifiable title indicating that the publication is retracted.
- A complete citation of the original article.
- An explanation of the reasons for retraction.
- Identification of the party issuing the notice.
- The date of the retraction notice.
- A link to the original article and appropriate links from the article to the retraction notice.
Retracted articles should remain accessible as part of the scholarly record, clearly marked as retracted, except where exceptional legal, privacy, or safety considerations justify restricting access to particular content.
The original article's abstract, landing page, and available full-text versions should clearly indicate its retracted status.
10.7. Publication Metadata and Indexing
Corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions should be represented appropriately in the journal's publication records and metadata.
Where technically feasible, relevant metadata should be updated or communicated to indexing and registration services to support accurate identification of the publication's status.
10.8. Author-Initiated Corrections and Retractions
Authors who identify substantial errors or serious reliability concerns in their published work must promptly inform the editorial office.
The editorial team evaluates the request and determines the appropriate action based on the nature of the problem and the available evidence.
Requests for retraction are not automatically granted solely because an author wishes to withdraw a published article.
10.9. Permanence of the Scholarly Record
JOLLT recognizes the importance of retaining transparent records of editorial changes affecting published articles.
Formal post-publication notices should remain publicly accessible and linked to the relevant publication.
Changes affecting the scholarly interpretation or reliability of an article must not be concealed through undocumented replacement or silent deletion.
11. COMPLAINTS AND EDITORIAL APPEALS
JOLLT provides a mechanism for authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders to raise concerns about editorial procedures, publication decisions, ethical conduct, or the management of published scholarly content.
11.1. Submission of Complaints
Complaints should be submitted to the journal's editorial office and should clearly explain the issue raised.
Where relevant, the complaint should include the manuscript or article identification, supporting documentation, and the outcome requested.
11.2. Assessment of Complaints
The editorial office examines the complaint and determines whether clarification, further review, or another appropriate response is required.
Complaints concerning an editor's conduct should be evaluated by an appropriately independent individual or authority.
11.3. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions
Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they have substantive grounds to believe that an error in evaluation, a procedural irregularity, or a relevant misunderstanding affected the decision.
An appeal must identify the decision challenged and provide a reasoned explanation supported by appropriate evidence.
Disagreement with a reviewer's opinion, without substantive supporting grounds, does not automatically justify reconsideration.
11.4. Independent Assessment
Where appropriate, an appeal may be evaluated by an editor who was not directly responsible for the original decision and who has no relevant conflict of interest.
The appeal may be upheld, rejected, or referred for additional editorial assessment depending on the circumstances.
11.5. Confidentiality and Professional Communication
Complaints and appeals must be handled respectfully and with appropriate confidentiality.
All parties are expected to communicate professionally and provide accurate information.
12. POLICY IMPLEMENTATION AND RESPONSIBILITY
The implementation of JOLLT's publication ethics policies requires cooperation between the journal's editorial team, reviewers, authors, publisher, and authorized technical personnel.
12.1. Editor in Chief
The Editor in Chief is responsible for overseeing the application of publication ethics policies, ensuring editorial independence, and coordinating appropriate responses to serious ethical concerns affecting the journal's scholarly publications.
12.2. Handling Editors
Handling editors are responsible for applying ethical standards during manuscript assessment, peer review, and editorial decision-making.
They must identify and manage relevant conflicts of interest and report substantive ethical concerns through the appropriate editorial procedures.
12.3. Publisher
Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika provides institutional support for responsible journal governance, transparent publication practices, and the maintenance of the scholarly publication record.
12.4. Authors and Reviewers
Authors and reviewers must comply with the ethical obligations relevant to their participation in the publication process.
They are expected to cooperate with legitimate editorial inquiries and provide relevant clarification or supporting information when necessary.
12.5. Policy Review and Updating
JOLLT may review and update its publication ethics policies to address developments in scholarly publishing, editorial practices, research integrity, and applicable institutional or legal requirements.
Substantive revisions should be communicated through the journal's official website.
12.6. Ethical Reporting and Contact
Questions, complaints, appeals, and concerns involving research or publication integrity may be directed to the editorial office using the contact information published on the journal website.
Editorial Contact: JOLLT Editorial Office.
13. RELATED JOURNAL POLICIES AND ETHICAL REFERENCES
This Publication Ethics and Editorial Policies statement should be read in conjunction with the journal's other policies concerning manuscript preparation, peer review, originality, copyright, open access, and digital preservation.
| Journal Policy | Access |
|---|---|
| Author Guidelines | View Author Guidelines |
| Screening for Plagiarism | View Plagiarism Policy |
| Peer Review Process | View Peer Review Process |
| Copyright and Licensing | View Copyright and License |
| Open Access Policy | View Open Access Policy |
| Electronic Archiving | View Digital Preservation Policy |
| Contact Information | Contact Editorial Office |
| COPE Core Practices | Official COPE Guidance |
| COPE Retraction Guidelines | Retraction Guidelines (2025) |
| Principles of Transparency | Transparency and Best Practice |
PUBLICATION ETHICS SUMMARY
JOLLT'S COMMITMENT TO ETHICAL SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING
JOLLT Journal of Languages and Language Teaching is committed to maintaining the integrity, credibility, transparency, and independence of scholarly publishing.
Authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher share responsibilities for ensuring research originality, accurate reporting, ethical compliance, confidentiality, and responsible scholarly communication.
The journal maintains procedures for evaluating allegations of research misconduct, managing conflicts of interest, facilitating post-publication discussion, resolving complaints and appeals, and correcting or retracting published articles when necessary.
Publication ethics concerns are addressed through proportionate, evidence-based editorial decisions intended to protect the reliability and integrity of the scholarly record.
Official Contact: JOLLT Editorial Office.
