Publication Ethics

Studies in English Language and Education (SiELE) adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to ensure that the publication process and outcome are ethical, following the best publication practice in all processes of publication. Please review the brief description of core practices at SiELE. For more detailed information, please refer to COPE official website

Allegations of Misconduct

When an allegation of misconduct is brought to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief, they will investigate the truth of this allegation. When there is a concern about a lack of ability or a conflict of interest, the Editor-in-Chief will advise the head of the Research of Community Service Department at Universitas Syiah Kuala to establish an independent committee to investigate the allegation. If the allegation is proven based on the result of the investigation, the Editor-in-Chief will take further action, including but not limited to article amendment, article retraction, author removal from authorship, and assignment of additional reviewers.

Authorship and Contributorship

The author must state the contribution of each author in a cover letter accompanying the manuscript when it is submitted to the journal, and it has to state that no deserving authors have been omitted from authorship. If there is a change in the authorship, the journal must be notified, and such changes must be explained in detail. The change in authorship will not be entertained after the final revision is submitted unless it can be clearly justified to be reviewed attentively, and all authors must consent to this change. A final revision is the revised version based on which the paper is accepted to be published. The number of authors for one manuscript published in the journal must not be more than seven authors. The journal only allows the following contributions to be listed as an author: data acquisition, data analysis, data interpretation, article writing, article critical reviewing, and final approval of the version to be published.

A corresponding author is an author with whom the journal communicates related to the publication process. The corresponding author cannot be changed except by force majeure (including mental illness, severe disease, and death of the current corresponding author) and authorship withdrawal of the present corresponding author. 

Complaints and Appeals

The Editor-in-Chief works with the handling editor to address complaints about publication decisions, publication process, and publication ethics. Authors are welcome to appeal if the article is rejected without satisfactory justification. Due to the high submission volume, the handling editors cannot provide a detailed description of the desk rejection following internal screening, but the decision is reviewed in case of an appeal. The decision is made based on the result of the latest internal review. Meanwhile, rejection after an external review is final, but an appeal is welcome if there is an inconsistency between the external review results and the editor’s decision. The editor's decision will be reviewed, and the result will be informed to the complainants and/or authors. Regarding the publication process, the handling editors always put their best effort into completing the review process on time. However, reviewers are busy academicians who sometimes cannot avoid delays in submitting their reviews. Authors are welcome to submit their complaints, and effort will be made if the delay is caused by the journal. Finally, when a complaint is raised about publication ethics, the Editor-in-Chief will consult COPE guidelines and take advised procedures to address the complaint. 

Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest occurs when the authors, their supervisors or their sponsors have certain relationships with other persons or organizations which can influence their research. All potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed by the authors when submitting the papers. The authors must also report a conflict of interest which might occur after the paper is submitted if it happens before the paper is officially published. SiELE adheres to COPE in handling potential undisclosed conflicts of interest raised during the review process or after the paper is published. For more information about conflict of interest, read this article

Upon receiving a report regarding potential undisclosed conflict of interest from editors or reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief notifies authors and expresses their concern. In the case that the authors deny the conflict of interest, the Editor-in-Chief explains the journal policy and definition of conflict of interest, and the authors need to sign a statement regarding all relevant conflicts of interest. Necessary revision is made and informed to the editors or reviewers.

If a reader raises a conflict of interest after the paper is published, the Editor-in-Chief contacts the authors to obtain an explanation. The Editor-in-Chief determines whether the conflict of interest exists. The authors’ organization is contacted when necessary. If a potential conflict of interest is found, the article will be re-assessed to determine whether the conflict of interest has potentially affected the research or review process. If the conflict of interest does not affect the article and the review process, a correction will be made. If it does, the article will be corrected or retracted, depending on the seriousness of the effect. The action made by the journal is informed to the reader who reported the case.

Data and Reproducibility

The authors are encouraged to share the data used in their papers to be published as a supplementary document. In the case that the authors use code-based statistical software such as Python and R, it is suggested that the code is also shared. The author is responsible for the accuracy of data, and no data fabrication or image manipulation is allowed. SiELE follows COPE guidance in handling cases of suspected data fabrication and image manipulation. 

When readers express their suspicion of fabricated data in a published article at SiELE, the Editor-in-Chief consults relevant data experts at Universitas Syiah Kuala. If suspicion is confirmed, the Editor-in-Chief contacts the authors to express their concern. The authors are invited to express their opinions on the matter. If there is no response from the authors, the Editor-in-Chief will attempt to contact the authors’ institutions. If the concern is proven, an expression of concern will be published, or the article will be retracted, depending on the nature of the evidence, and the readers who raise the suspicion will be informed of the decision.

When readers express their suspicion of image manipulation in a published article at SiELE, the Editor-in-Chief contacts all authors, inviting them to explain the concern. Their institution may also be contacted if necessary. If the manipulation is found, the Editor-in-Chief determines whether the manipulation is minor or serious. The Editor-in-Chief informs the authors about the action that will be taken, such as requesting correction, publishing an expression of concern, or retracting the article. The Editor-in-Chief informs the readers who express their concern about the action taken by the journal.

Ethical Oversight

Editorial staff observes the ethical compliance of research which has been considered to be reviewed for publication in SiELE. As defined by COPE, ethical oversight includes “publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and ethical business/marketing practices”, and other issues related to research and publication ethics. All authors must be transparent on how ethics approval and consent are obtained and followed throughout research and publication. 

When readers express their concern regarding suspicion of violations of ethical oversight, the Editor-in-Chief investigates the suspicion and takes necessary action. If the violation is proven, the action will be taken based on the nature of the violation, such as a request for correction or article retraction. The readers who express the concern will be informed of the decision. 

Intellectual Property

All authors are required to obtain the intellectual property right of any materials included in the submitted manuscript, including tables and figures. In addition, the manuscript should not contain or be based on any data or information which breach the national or legal framework of a country. Information obtained from any source needs to be appropriately cited. The similarity index allowed is 20%, but intentional use of texts from other sources without proper citation is not allowed, although the overall similarity index is under 20%. Furthermore, all articles published in Studies in English Language and Education are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

A concern regarding intellectual property issues, including plagiarism, raised by editors and reviewers will be investigated by the Editor-in-Chief. If the concern is proven, a correction will be requested for minor issues, and an explanation from the authors will be requested for a bigger concern. If the explanation from the authors is unsatisfactory, the manuscript will be rejected. If the explanation is satisfactory, the Editor-in-Chief might consider rejection or request correction. The editors or reviewers who raised the issue will informed of the action. The authors’ institution might be contacted if necessary.

If a concern is raised by readers for a published article, a correction (for minor issues) or explanation (for major issues) will be requested from the authors. If the explanation from the authors is unsatisfactory, the manuscript will be retracted. If the explanation is satisfactory, the Editor-in-Chief might consider retraction or request correction. The editors or reviewers who raised the issue will informed of the action. The authors’ institution might be contacted if necessary.

Journal Management

Studies in English Language and Education (SiELE) is not a member of COPE. However, SiELE follows COPE Core Practices on authorship, contributorship, peer review processes, and publication process. The journal also follows COPE Core Practice in responding to suspected ethical breaches by authors, reviewers, and editors. In addition, the journal has an open access policy following DOAJ guidelines and adheres to the principle of transparency.

Peer Review Processes

In recruiting reviewers from the editor or other reviewer suggestions, the editors of SiELE verifies their identity, including their institution and use only legitimate institution email address. To avoid potential peer review manipulation, SiELE does not accept reviewer suggestions from authors. For the same purpose, SiELE only does not allow submissions by third parties. The editors and Editor-in-Chief monitor review results submitted by reviewers to detect potential manipulation of the review process.

In assigning a reviewer to assess a manuscript, SiELE considers the reviewer’s expertise and potential conflict of interest. Their expertise is checked through their publications. The reviewer is requested to declare the absence of a conflict of interest for the manuscript that they review. They are always given the option to decline to review a manuscript if they have a conflict of interest or if the manuscript is not within their expertise. 

If peer review manipulation is suspected after publication, the Editor-in-Chief will investigate the legitimacy of the reviewers. If the reviewers are proven legitimate, the Editor-in-Chief will check their expertise. If the Editor-in-Chief is made known that the reviewers do not have adequate expertise to review the manuscript, the manuscript will undergo a post-publication review. This review can result in correction, retraction, or adding expressions of concern.

Post-Publication Discussions

When SiELE receives a critique from readers regarding the manuscript which has previously been published, the Editor-in-Chief will investigate this critique to determine whether it is defamatory or libellous. The critique is rejected if it is potentially libellous or defamatory. If not, the critique is investigated further, which can result in article correction and publication of the critique along with the author’s response.

When SiELE receives a notice from readers about redundant publication, the Editor-in-Chief investigates the nature of this redundancy. If a minor redundancy is found, the author is requested to revise the article by adding missing citations and references. If a major redundancy is found, the author is requested to explain the concern. If the explanation is unsatisfactory or in the case that the author admits the mistake, the Editor-in-Chief informs the editor of the journal from which the duplicate publication is found, and the article is retracted. If the explanation is satisfactory, the Editor-in-Chief may consider retraction or correction. The author’s institution might be contacted if necessary. The readers who raised the concern are informed of the action.