Publication Ethics

The Art of Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TATEFL) is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics and research integrity. The journal follows the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to promote transparency, accountability, fairness, and responsible scholarly publishing. All parties involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher, are expected to uphold these principles.

1. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must submit original work, appropriately acknowledge all sources, and ensure that the manuscript does not contain plagiarism, unattributed material, or inappropriate text reuse. Any use of previously published material must be properly acknowledged.
Authorship and Contributions: All listed authors must have made meaningful scholarly contributions to the research and must approve the final manuscript. Individuals who have contributed to the work but do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately. Authorship must not be assigned to individuals who have not made a qualifying contribution. AI tools cannot be listed as authors.
Accuracy and Research Integrity: Authors must report their research methods, data, findings, and interpretations accurately. Fabrication, falsification, inappropriate manipulation of data, and other forms of research misconduct are prohibited.
Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence: Authors must use AI tools responsibly and transparently in accordance with TATEFL's AI policy. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their manuscripts, including content developed or revised with AI assistance. AI-generated information, references, and outputs must be verified before submission, and AI use must be disclosed as required by the journal.
Multiple, Redundant, and Concurrent Submissions: Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals. Substantial overlap with previously published or submitted work must be disclosed, and redundant publication is not permitted.
Conflicts of Interest: Authors must disclose financial, personal, professional, or institutional relationships that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, their research or its interpretation.
Research Ethics and Participant Protection: Authors must comply with applicable ethical standards for research involving human participants. Where applicable, they must obtain ethical approval, informed consent, and permission to publish identifiable information. Any relevant ethical approval or exemption must be reported accurately.
Data Availability and Reproducibility: Authors must maintain appropriate research records and provide supporting data or materials when reasonably requested, subject to ethical, legal, confidentiality, and data protection requirements. Data availability statements should be provided when required by the journal.
Corrections and Retractions: Authors must promptly inform the editor if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work and cooperate with the journal in issuing a correction, retraction, or other appropriate notice.

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts and all related communications as confidential. Manuscripts must not be shared, reproduced, or used for personal or professional advantage without authorization.
Objectivity and Fairness: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively, impartially, and on the basis of scholarly quality, originality, relevance, methodological rigor, and contribution to the field. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.
Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest and decline the review when such conflicts may compromise their impartiality.
Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide clear, respectful, evidence-based comments that help authors improve their manuscripts. Criticism should be supported by relevant scholarly reasoning.
Recognition of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant publications that have not been cited and alert the editor to potential plagiarism, redundant publication, inappropriate citation practices, or other ethical concerns.
Responsible Use of AI: Reviewers must protect manuscript confidentiality when using AI tools. They must not upload confidential manuscripts or unpublished research to AI systems without appropriate authorization and safeguards. Reviewers remain responsible for their assessments and must comply with the journal's applicable AI policy.
Timeliness: Reviewers should complete their assessments within the agreed timeframe or inform the editor promptly if they cannot do so.

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

Fair and Independent Editorial Decisions: Editors must evaluate manuscripts according to their scholarly merit, originality, relevance, methodological quality, and suitability for the journal. Decisions must not be influenced by authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, personal relationships, or other irrelevant characteristics.
Confidentiality: Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, author information, reviewer identities where applicable, and editorial communications.
Conflicts of Interest: Editors must disclose actual or potential conflicts of interest and delegate editorial responsibility when necessary to ensure an impartial assessment.
Peer Review Integrity: Editors must ensure that manuscripts are assessed through the journal's stated peer review process and that reviewer selection is appropriate. Editorial decisions should be based on the available scholarly evidence and the outcomes of the review process.
Research Misconduct: Editors must take credible allegations of misconduct seriously, whether identified before or after publication. Potential concerns, including plagiarism, fabricated data, falsified findings, inappropriate authorship, and undisclosed or inappropriate AI use, must be assessed fairly and confidentially.
Similarity and AI Screening: Editors may use appropriate screening tools to identify potential concerns. Similarity percentages and AI detection scores must not be treated as conclusive evidence of misconduct. Editorial decisions should consider the context, available evidence, and explanations provided by the authors.
Complaints and Appeals: Editors must consider complaints and appeals concerning editorial decisions, peer review, or publication ethics fairly and transparently. Appeals should be assessed on their merits, with additional independent advice sought when appropriate.
Corrections and Retractions: Editors must take appropriate action when significant errors or ethical concerns are identified in published articles. Depending on the circumstances, this may include publishing a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction.

4. Ethical Responsibilities of the Publisher

Support for Publication Ethics: The publisher must support the journal in maintaining appropriate publication ethics policies and procedures consistent with the principles of COPE.
Editorial Independence: The publisher must respect editorial independence and must not improperly influence editorial decisions based on commercial, institutional, or personal interests.
Transparency: Publication policies, authorship requirements, peer review procedures, conflicts of interest, publication fees, and relevant editorial processes must be communicated clearly to authors and readers.
Handling Ethical Concerns: The publisher must support the editor in addressing credible allegations of misconduct, complaints, appeals, and other publication ethics concerns through appropriate procedures.
Protection of the Scholarly Record: The publisher must support the publication of corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, and other notices when necessary to preserve the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.
Confidentiality and Data Protection: The publisher must take reasonable measures to protect confidential editorial information and personal data in accordance with applicable requirements.

5. Research Misconduct and Ethical Investigations

TATEFL takes allegations of research misconduct seriously. Such allegations may concern plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, breaches of research ethics, or other practices that undermine the integrity of scholarly publishing.

When a concern is raised, the editorial team will assess the available information and may request an explanation or supporting documentation from the authors. Where necessary, the journal may consult reviewers, relevant experts, the authors' institutions, or other appropriate parties. The individuals concerned will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond, subject to the requirements of a fair and confidential investigation.

Actions will depend on the nature and seriousness of the concern and the available evidence. Possible outcomes include requesting clarification, requiring revisions, rejecting a manuscript, publishing a correction or expression of concern, retracting a published article, or referring the matter to an appropriate institution. TATEFL will follow relevant COPE guidance when addressing suspected misconduct.

6. Complaints and Appeals

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal if they believe that an editorial decision resulted from a significant factual error, a procedural irregularity, or an inappropriate interpretation of their manuscript. Appeals should provide a clear explanation and relevant supporting evidence.

Complaints concerning editorial conduct, peer review, or publication ethics should be submitted to the journal's editorial team through its official contact channels. Complaints involving the editor-in-chief should be directed to the publisher or another appropriate independent representative, where available.

All complaints and appeals will be considered fairly and confidentially. The journal may seek independent advice where appropriate. Submitting an appeal does not guarantee a change in the original decision.

7. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

TATEFL is committed to preserving the accuracy and reliability of the published scholarly record. When errors or ethical concerns are identified after publication, the journal will assess their nature, significance, and implications for the article's findings and conclusions.

Corrections: A correction may be published when an identified error can be addressed without invalidating the overall findings or conclusions of the article.
Expressions of Concern: An expression of concern may be issued when serious questions arise about an article's reliability or ethical compliance and further investigation is required.
Retractions: A retraction may be issued when the evidence indicates that an article's findings are unreliable or when serious ethical violations undermine its validity or integrity.

Corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions will be clearly identified and linked to the original publication wherever practicable. Decisions will be made in accordance with relevant publication ethics guidance and the need to maintain an accurate scholarly record.

8. Commitment to Publication Ethics

TATEFL expects all authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher to act honestly, responsibly, and transparently throughout the publication process. The journal is committed to addressing ethical concerns fairly, protecting the integrity of scholarly communication, and improving its editorial practices in accordance with relevant COPE guidance.

For further information, readers and contributors may consult the COPE Core Practices and the COPE website.