Publication Ethics

English Language Instruction Studies (ELIS) is committed to maintaining high standards of integrity, transparency, accountability, fairness, and ethical conduct throughout the scholarly publishing process. This Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement establishes the responsibilities and ethical expectations applicable to authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher. All manuscripts submitted to ELIS are expected to comply with responsible research practices, established principles of scholarly communication, and relevant ethical requirements applicable to the research being reported.

ELIS takes allegations of unethical conduct seriously and seeks to address them through fair, confidential, and proportionate procedures. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, originality, methodological quality, relevance to the journal's scope, clarity of presentation, and compliance with ethical standards. Decisions must not be influenced by inappropriate commercial, personal, institutional, political, or other external considerations unrelated to the academic quality and integrity of the submitted work.

Duties of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring that manuscripts submitted to ELIS represent original, accurate, and ethically conducted scholarly work. Authors must present their research methods, data, analyses, and findings honestly and must not fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or selectively misrepresent research materials or results.

Authors must ensure that:

  • the manuscript is original and has not been published previously;
  • the manuscript is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal;
  • all sources and contributions from other works are appropriately acknowledged and cited;
  • data and findings are reported accurately and transparently;
  • all individuals listed as authors meet the journal's authorship criteria;
  • relevant conflicts of interest and funding sources are disclosed;
  • ethical approval and informed consent are obtained when required;
  • the manuscript complies with applicable research ethics standards; and
  • any significant errors discovered after submission or publication are promptly reported to the journal.

Authors must cooperate with editors during peer review, revision, correction, or investigation of potential ethical concerns.

Duties of Editors

Editors are responsible for maintaining the integrity, fairness, confidentiality, and academic quality of the editorial process. Manuscripts must be evaluated according to their scholarly merit, relevance, originality, methodological rigor, and contribution to the field.

Editors must:

  • make editorial decisions independently and fairly;
  • ensure that manuscripts receive appropriate editorial assessment and peer review;
  • maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and associated information;
  • avoid using unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for personal or professional advantage;
  • disclose and appropriately manage potential conflicts of interest;
  • select reviewers with appropriate expertise and without known conflicts of interest;
  • protect the integrity and anonymity of the peer-review process;
  • respond appropriately to allegations of plagiarism, data fabrication, authorship disputes, research misconduct, or other ethical concerns; and
  • facilitate corrections, retractions, or other post-publication actions when necessary.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by an author's nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, personal background, or other characteristics unrelated to the scholarly quality of the manuscript.

Duties of Reviewers

Peer reviewers play an essential role in maintaining the scholarly quality and integrity of ELIS. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, evidence-based, and timely assessments that assist editors in making informed editorial decisions and help authors improve their manuscripts.

Reviewers must:

  • accept assignments only when they possess appropriate expertise and sufficient time to conduct the review;
  • maintain strict confidentiality regarding manuscripts and review materials;
  • evaluate manuscripts objectively and respectfully;
  • provide clear and academically justified comments;
  • identify relevant published work that authors may have overlooked where appropriate;
  • notify the editor of suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabrication, or other potential misconduct;
  • disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest; and
  • refrain from using unpublished ideas, information, or data obtained through peer review for personal benefit.

Reviewers must not contact authors directly regarding manuscripts under review unless explicitly authorized by the journal.

Duties of the Publisher

Global Insight Publishing, as the publisher of ELIS, is responsible for supporting an editorial environment in which decisions can be made independently, ethically, transparently, and according to scholarly considerations. The publisher respects the editorial authority of the journal and does not seek to influence acceptance or rejection decisions for commercial, institutional, personal, or other inappropriate reasons. Academic quality and research integrity must remain central to publication decisions.

The publisher supports appropriate technological and administrative infrastructure for manuscript management, publication, accessibility, and maintenance of the scholarly record. It also works with the editorial team to ensure that journal policies are publicly available and consistently communicated to authors, reviewers, and readers. Where technical or administrative matters affect publication integrity, the publisher should take reasonable measures to resolve them transparently and preserve the reliability of published content.

When credible concerns arise about a submitted or published work, the publisher will support editors in conducting appropriate inquiries and implementing necessary post-publication measures. These may include corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or other notices when warranted by the evidence. The publisher may also cooperate with institutions or other relevant parties when their involvement is reasonably necessary to investigate serious allegations and maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

Authorship Policy

Authorship should accurately reflect substantial intellectual contributions to the research and manuscript. Individuals listed as authors should have participated meaningfully in important aspects of the work, such as the conception or design of the study, collection or interpretation of data, substantive development or revision of the manuscript, or other significant scholarly contributions. All authors should approve the final manuscript and accept appropriate responsibility for the integrity of their contributions.

Individuals whose involvement is limited to administrative assistance, general supervision, technical support, language editing, financial support, or other contributions that do not justify authorship should normally be acknowledged rather than included as authors. ELIS does not accept guest, gift, honorary, or ghost authorship because these practices misrepresent scholarly responsibility and contribution. Authors are responsible for discussing and determining authorship appropriately before manuscript submission.

Any request to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission must be accompanied by an appropriate explanation and agreement from the affected authors and is subject to editorial consideration. Artificial intelligence systems and generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot provide informed approval, disclose conflicts of interest, assume legal or ethical responsibility, or be held accountable for the accuracy and integrity of scholarly work.

Plagiarism Policy

ELIS does not tolerate plagiarism or the inappropriate appropriation of another person's intellectual work. Plagiarism may include verbatim copying without appropriate attribution, substantial unattributed paraphrasing, presenting another person's ideas or data as one's own, inappropriate reproduction of figures or other materials, and other forms of intellectual misrepresentation. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all sources used in their manuscripts are accurately acknowledged and cited.

Submitted manuscripts may be examined using appropriate similarity-detection software as part of editorial screening. A similarity report is intended to assist editorial judgment and will not normally be interpreted solely according to a numerical percentage. Editors should consider the source, extent, distribution, nature, and context of identified similarities, including whether matching material consists of properly cited quotations, methodological terminology, references, legitimate technical expressions, or potentially inappropriate textual overlap.

When significant plagiarism or inappropriate duplication is identified before publication, the manuscript may be returned to the authors for clarification, rejected, or subjected to further investigation depending on its seriousness. If such problems are identified after publication, ELIS may issue a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or other appropriate notice. Decisions will be based on the nature and severity of the problem and its implications for the integrity of the published record.

Data Availability

ELIS encourages transparency regarding the evidence supporting published research. Authors should maintain accurate and appropriately documented records of research data, instruments, materials, coding procedures, analytical processes, and other relevant information underlying their findings. Where legally, ethically, technically, and practically possible, authors are encouraged to make supporting data available in ways that facilitate verification, responsible reuse, replication, or further scholarly investigation while protecting legitimate interests.

Authors may be requested to provide relevant data or supporting documentation during editorial assessment, peer review, or investigation of concerns regarding a submitted or published manuscript. Any information supplied to the journal must respect participant confidentiality, informed consent, intellectual property rights, institutional requirements, and applicable laws. Editors should not require public disclosure when doing so would violate ethical commitments, confidentiality obligations, or legitimate restrictions governing the research.

Where appropriate, authors should include a Data Availability Statement describing whether the data supporting the findings are publicly available, available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request, subject to restricted access, or unavailable for legitimate ethical or legal reasons. When data are deposited in an appropriate repository, authors should provide sufficient information to identify and access the dataset, subject to applicable restrictions.

Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when personal, professional, financial, institutional, academic, or other relationships could influence, or reasonably appear to influence, an individual's judgment in the research or publication process. Authors, editors, and reviewers are responsible for disclosing relevant circumstances that could affect impartiality or create a reasonable perception of bias. Transparent disclosure allows potential conflicts to be appropriately evaluated and managed.

Authors should disclose relevant financial support, employment relationships, institutional interests, personal relationships, consulting arrangements, academic competition, or other circumstances that may be relevant to interpretation of their work. Funding sources and the role of funders in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or publication decisions should be identified when applicable. Absence of a conflict may also be explicitly declared where required by the journal.

Editors and reviewers should decline involvement when a conflict is sufficiently significant to compromise independent judgment. When uncertainty exists, the potential conflict should be disclosed to the appropriate editor rather than concealed. The presence of a disclosed conflict does not automatically make research unsuitable for publication; however, failure to disclose a significant conflict may require editorial action if it affects the credibility, interpretation, review, or integrity of the publication.

Corrections and Retractions

ELIS is committed to preserving an accurate, transparent, and reliable scholarly record. When errors or significant concerns are identified after publication, the journal will evaluate their nature, extent, and implications before determining the appropriate response. Minor errors that do not materially affect the interpretation of an article may be handled differently from substantive errors that affect important findings, analyses, conclusions, authorship information, or other elements of the publication.

A formal correction may be issued when an error affects part of an article but does not invalidate the work as a whole. Depending on the circumstances, post-publication notices may include corrections, corrigenda, errata, or expressions of concern. Such notices should be clearly linked to the original publication and provide sufficient information for readers to understand what has been changed or what concern remains under investigation.

Retraction may be necessary when reliable evidence indicates that findings are seriously unreliable because of major error or misconduct, substantial plagiarism or redundant publication has occurred, research was conducted unethically, or another serious problem undermines the integrity of the article. Retraction notices should clearly identify the affected publication and state the reason for retraction as transparently as circumstances permit. ELIS seeks to preserve the publication record rather than silently delete problematic articles.

Complaints and Appeals

ELIS recognizes the right of authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders to raise legitimate complaints about journal procedures, editorial conduct, publication ethics, or published content. Complaints should clearly describe the issue and provide relevant information or documentation that can assist appropriate assessment. The journal will seek to handle complaints fairly, respectfully, confidentially where appropriate, and without retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant factual, procedural, or scholarly error affected the evaluation of their manuscript. An appeal should provide a clear academic justification and directly address the reasons given for the original decision. Merely disagreeing with reviewers or editors does not itself constitute sufficient grounds for an appeal. Submission of an appeal does not guarantee reconsideration, external review, or reversal of the original decision.

Where appropriate, a complaint or appeal should be considered by an editor or publisher representative who was not directly responsible for the disputed matter. If a concern involves the Editor-in-Chief, it may be referred to an appropriate representative of Global Insight Publishing to preserve procedural fairness. Decisions following review of complaints or appeals should be communicated clearly to the relevant parties, subject to confidentiality and other legitimate limitations.

Research Misconduct

ELIS considers fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, deliberate manipulation of data or research materials, serious image manipulation, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, undisclosed duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship practices, unethical treatment of research participants, and deliberate misrepresentation of research to constitute potential forms of research misconduct. Honest errors or legitimate differences in scholarly interpretation should not automatically be characterized as misconduct without appropriate consideration of the circumstances and available evidence.

When suspected misconduct is reported or detected, the journal will conduct an initial assessment and may request explanations, original data, ethical approval documents, research instruments, correspondence, or other relevant materials. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to cooperate with legitimate inquiries. The journal will seek to distinguish credible concerns from unsupported allegations and will avoid treating an allegation as established misconduct before the available evidence has been appropriately considered.

Depending on the seriousness and stage of the case, possible actions may include suspension of editorial processing, rejection of a manuscript, correction or retraction of a published article, restriction of further editorial consideration where justified, or communication with relevant institutions or authorities when necessary. The purpose of such action is to protect participants, readers, the journal, and the integrity of the scholarly record rather than to impose arbitrary punishment.