At Language Teaching Futures, we are committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and accountability in all aspects of scholarly publishing. Ethical conduct is essential to maintaining trust among authors, reviewers, editors, and readers, and to ensuring the credibility of the research we publish. These ethical guidelines outline the responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher, and provide clear procedures for addressing issues such as plagiarism, data integrity, authorship, conflicts of interest, and the responsible use of emerging technologies. By adhering to these principles, Language Teaching Futures aims to foster a culture of honesty, fairness, and respect in academic communication, ensuring that every published article contributes meaningfully and ethically to the advancement of knowledge in language teaching and research.
Duties of Editors
Make independent publication decisions guided by the work’s validity, significance, and legal/ethical requirements.
Ensure peer review is fair, unbiased, timely, and typically involves ≥2 qualified, independent reviewers; avoid fraudulent reviewers.
Practice fair play—evaluate manuscripts on intellectual merit without discrimination.
Promote transparent policies and clear expectations for authors and reviewers; use the journal’s standard submission system.
Establish, with the publisher, a transparent process for appeals of decisions.
Avoid manipulating journal metrics or coercing citations; remove inappropriate citation requests from reviewer comments.
Maintain confidentiality of submissions and reviewer identities (unless open review is used and consented).
Never use unpublished material or privileged ideas for personal advantage.
Follow the journal’s generative-AI policy for editorial processes.
Disclose and manage editorial conflicts of interest; do not handle papers with personal conflicts (own work, family, close colleagues, related products/services).
Safeguard the published record: investigate alleged misconduct, use detection systems (e.g., plagiarism checks), and issue corrections/retractions/expressions of concern as needed.
Stay current on policies that protect publication integrity for editors, reviewers, and authors.
Duties of Reviewers
Assist editorial decisions and help authors improve manuscripts through constructive feedback.
Watch for ethical issues (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate publication) and alert the editor to overlaps with known work, citing appropriately.
Decline reviews when unqualified or unable to deliver a prompt, thorough review.
Be objective and avoid personal criticism; support opinions with clear arguments.
Disclose potential conflicts of interest to the editor and recuse if bias may exist (e.g., recent collaborations, same institution, close relationships).
Suggest citations only for genuine scholarly reasons; provide full details and justification; avoid self-serving citation requests.
Keep all materials confidential; do not share reviews or contact authors without editor permission.
Seek editor approval before co-reviewing or discussing with colleagues, and ensure participants receive credit.
Do not use unpublished data/ideas for personal advantage.
Comply with the journal’s policy on the use of generative AI in peer review.
Duties of Authors
Report research accurately and objectively; include sufficient detail and references for reproducibility; avoid fraudulent/inaccurate statements.
Provide, retain, and—when appropriate—share underlying data in line with journal requirements.
Ensure originality; obtain permissions where needed; acknowledge others’ work with proper citation; avoid all forms of plagiarism.
Avoid redundant, duplicate, or concurrent submissions; pursue secondary publication only when justified and transparent (with primary source cited).
Cite relevant, verifiable literature (prefer peer-reviewed with persistent identifiers); avoid excessive/self-serving or arranged citation practices.
Keep information from confidential services (peer review, grant review) private and do not use it without written permission.
Meet authorship criteria (substantial contributions); acknowledge non-author contributions; ensure all authors approve the final manuscript and submission; take collective responsibility.
Follow journal policies on the use of generative AI in writing and figures.
Respect jurisdictional-claims guidance (neutrality on territorial disputes; clear, accurate maps and institutional names).
Disclose hazards; follow ethical and legal standards for human/animal research (e.g., consent, IRB/IACUC approvals; Declaration of Helsinki, ARRIVE, relevant regulations).
Declare all competing interests and funding sources, including sponsor roles; disclose early and transparently.
Promptly correct or retract work when significant errors are identified and cooperate with editors/publishers.
Maintain image integrity (no feature manipulation; only permissible adjustments that do not hide information) and comply with any journal-specific image policies.
For clinical trials, follow transparency standards (e.g., registration and CONSORT where applicable).
Article Correction, Retraction, and Removal Policy
1. Policy Overview
Language Teaching Futures is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and completeness in the scholarly record. Published articles form part of the permanent scientific record and are corrected only when necessary to ensure accuracy and transparency. Corrections, retractions, or removals are implemented to protect the reliability and credibility of published work. The editor, guided by the journal’s policies and relevant legal requirements, has sole responsibility for deciding what is published. All corrective actions will be permanently linked to the original article to maintain an open and traceable publication record.
2. Article Correction
Corrigendum: Issued when authors correct an error that does not affect the results or conclusions of the article.
Erratum: Issued when the publisher corrects an error introduced during the production or publication process.
Author/Contributor Corrections: Adjustments to the author list may be made if properly justified and supported by documentation.
Editor’s Notes: Issued when clarification is needed but does not warrant a correction, retraction, or expression of concern.
3. Expression of Concern
An Expression of Concern alerts readers to potential reliability issues in a published article when:
Evidence suggests possible errors or misconduct, but investigations are inconclusive or delayed.
An investigation cannot be conducted fairly or in a timely manner.
Expressions of concern remain part of the permanent record and may later be updated with the outcome (correction, retraction, or clarification).
4. Article Withdrawal
Applies only to Articles-in-Press (accepted but not finalized).
An article may be withdrawn when:
It was published prematurely due to editorial or production error.
It duplicates another publication in error.
Withdrawn articles are replaced with a statement explaining the reason for withdrawal and a link to this policy.
5. Article Retraction
Retractions correct the record when errors or ethical breaches significantly undermine trust in the article’s findings.
Grounds for retraction include:
Major errors, data fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism.
Duplicate or redundant publication without proper disclosure.
Unauthorized publication of data or breach of copyright.
Unethical research involving human or animal subjects.
Manipulated peer review or citation practices.
Undisclosed conflicts of interest that affect interpretation.
Misrepresentation of authorship or sale of authorship.
Best practice:
A retraction notice titled “Retraction: [Article Title]” is published and linked to the original article.
The original article remains accessible with a watermark “Retracted” on each page.
The HTML version of the article is removed, but metadata and the retraction notice remain publicly available.
6. Article Removal
Article removal occurs only in exceptional legal or safety circumstances, such as when:
The article is defamatory or infringes legal rights.
The article is subject to a court order.
The article poses a serious public health or safety risk.
In such cases, the metadata (title and authors) will remain visible with a note stating that the article has been removed for legal reasons.
7. Article Replacement
In rare cases where an article may pose a health or safety risk, the authors may retract and republish a corrected version.
The retraction notice will link to the new version and include a full publication history to ensure transparency.
8. Archival Policy
All versions of published, corrected, retracted, or removed articles are permanently preserved in Language Teaching Futures’ official archive, ensuring that the scholarly record remains complete, accessible, and traceable.
The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Manuscript Preparation
Language Teaching Futures recognizes the potential of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies (“AI Tools”) to support authors in research and writing. When used responsibly, these tools can enhance efficiency, provide insights, help synthesize literature, and improve clarity and structure.
However, AI Tools must never substitute human expertise, judgment, or critical thinking. Authors remain fully responsible and accountable for the content of their manuscripts. AI use must always be transparent, ethical, and conducted with human oversight and control.
Authors are responsible for:
Reviewing and verifying the accuracy, completeness, and impartiality of all AI-generated text, data, and references.
Ensuring that all material reflects the author’s own analysis, interpretation, and scholarly contribution.
Providing a clear disclosure statement of AI use upon submission, specifying the tool(s) used, their purpose, and the extent of oversight.
Respecting data privacy, copyright, and intellectual property rights by checking the terms and conditions of any AI Tool used.
Responsible Use of AI Tools
Authors must ensure AI tools preserve confidentiality and privacy, especially for unpublished manuscripts or personal data.
AI should not be used to generate images of real individuals, copyrighted content, or identifiable brands without permission.
Authors must verify all outputs for factual accuracy and potential bias.
Authors should not grant AI tools rights over their data beyond what is needed to provide the service and must ensure the tool’s terms do not restrict later publication.
AI-generated material must not infringe upon intellectual property or copyright law.
Disclosure
Authors must disclose any use of AI Tools in manuscript preparation in a dedicated AI declaration statement upon submission. This statement should include:
The name and version of the AI Tool used.
The specific purpose for which it was used.
The author’s oversight in reviewing and editing the output.
Transparency strengthens trust between authors, editors, reviewers, and readers.
Note: Basic grammar and spell-checking tools do not require disclosure. Use of AI in the research process must be described in detail in the Methods section.
Authorship
AI Tools must not be listed or cited as authors or co-authors. Authorship implies human accountability, intellectual contribution, and the ability to take responsibility for the integrity of the work.
Each listed author must:
Approve the final version of the manuscript.
Agree to its submission.
Be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the work.
AI Use in Figures, Images, and Artwork
Language Teaching Futures does not permit the use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create, modify, or enhance images in submitted manuscripts.
This includes enhancing, obscuring, moving, or removing features within figures or images.
Only standard adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if they do not alter the original information.
Exceptions apply when the use of AI forms part of the research methodology (e.g., AI-assisted imaging in data analysis). In such cases, the use must be clearly and reproducibly described in the Methods section, including:
The name, version, and source of the AI tool.
How the tool was used in image creation or analysis.
Any pre-AI and raw data or images provided for editorial review.
AI-generated graphical abstracts or artwork are not permitted, except for cover art where prior written permission is obtained from the journal editor. Authors must demonstrate that all rights have been cleared and appropriate attribution is given.
Handling of Ethical Misconduct
Introduction
As editors of Language Teaching Futures, your primary responsibility is to ensure that all published work upholds the journal’s standards of academic integrity, originality, and ethical conduct. While most submissions follow ethical norms, editors may occasionally encounter cases of potential misconduct during peer review or after publication.
Common ethical issues include:
Plagiarism
Authorship and contribution disputes
Duplicate submission or publication
Violations of research and ethical standards
Manipulation of the peer review process
Inappropriate duplication or alteration of images or data
These guidelines are designed to assist editors in identifying and addressing ethical concerns consistently, fairly, and in line with international publishing ethics standards.
1. Plagiarism
Plagiarism occurs when an author uses another’s work without permission, acknowledgment, or proper citation. It may take several forms:
Literal copying: Direct word-for-word reproduction of another’s work, in whole or in part.
Substantial copying: Reproducing a significant portion of another’s work without acknowledgment. The “substantial” nature depends on both the quantity and the importance of the copied content.
Paraphrasing without attribution: Using another’s ideas, data, or structure while altering the wording but failing to credit the source.
Editors should use plagiarism detection tools to identify overlaps and, when necessary, seek expert opinions to determine the extent and severity of potential plagiarism.
2. Authorship and Contribution Disputes
Editors must ensure that all individuals listed as authors have made a significant scholarly contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research, and that all contributors have approved the final version of the manuscript.
Common authorship issues include:
Ghost authorship: Qualified contributors omitted from the author list.
Gift or guest authorship: Individuals listed as authors despite not meeting authorship criteria.
Editors should request clarification when contributions are unclear and ensure that contributors who do not meet authorship criteria are acknowledged appropriately.
3. Duplicate Submission or Publication
Submissions to Language Teaching Futures must be original and unpublished. Authors may not submit the same work to multiple journals simultaneously. Duplicate submission includes literal or partial duplication and cases where the same research appears in several slightly modified papers.
Editors should verify any potential overlap with published or submitted works. If a duplicate publication is suspected, the editor should contact the author for clarification and may seek advice from the editorial board before making a decision.
4. Research Standards Violations
Research involving human or animal participants must comply with institutional, national, and international ethical standards. Authors must confirm that:
Informed consent and ethical approval were obtained where applicable.
Data privacy and confidentiality were respected.
Research involving animals followed accepted welfare standards.
If a violation or uncertainty arises, editors should request supporting documentation (e.g., ethics committee approval) and may seek expert input before proceeding.
5. Manipulation of the Peer Review Process
Editors must remain alert to unethical practices that compromise peer review integrity, such as:
Authors suggesting fictitious reviewers or providing false contact information.
Reviewers with undisclosed conflicts of interest.
Patterns of suspiciously rapid or overly similar reviews.
Editors should verify reviewer identities through institutional affiliations or professional databases. Reviewers with potential conflicts should be excluded.
6. Image or Data Manipulation
Manipulation of figures or data to misrepresent results is considered a serious form of misconduct. This includes enhancing, duplicating, or altering images in ways that distort findings.
If image manipulation is suspected:
The editor should request original, unedited data or images from the author.
Expert reviewers or image-analysis tools may be consulted.
The issue should be investigated confidentially, with authors given an opportunity to respond.
7. Responding to Ethical Concerns
When potential misconduct is identified:
The editor should gather relevant evidence and contact the author(s) for an explanation.
If necessary, the matter should be referred to the journal’s editorial ethics committee.
Depending on findings, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction in accordance with the Language Teaching Futures correction and retraction policy.
All investigations will be handled confidentially, fairly, and transparently, with respect for due process.