Editorial Policy

JOLAN’s editorial policy is based on Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE)’s standards and principles. It aims to promote integrity in scholarly research and its publication. JOLAN will continue to make independent decisions based on its existing policies and ethics.

Editors Responsibilities. In addition to managing the review process to make sure it is comprehensive, equitable, and timely, the General Editor is in charge of the journal's overall intellectual content and quality. In addition to choosing papers for the peer review process that offer fresh, unique, and significant advances to knowledge, the General Editor is in charge of maintaining the journal's goals, scope and purview. The General Editor is in charge of the editorial board's activities and acts as its chair. For special issues, the General Editor has the authority to assign guest editors, publish editorials, and request manuscripts through calls for papers. One of the journal's other Editors will be in charge of editorial responsibility and authority for any submission written by an editor and submitted to JOLAN.

Conflicts of interest should be avoided by the Editors and authors' intellectual independence should be respected by them. In addition to making sure that the published papers align with the editorial policy, the General Editor oversees the peer-review process to guarantee impartiality, timeliness, thoroughness, and civility. The General Editor is in charge of selecting which papers to publish. For a thematic issue, the General Editor may choose one or more guest editors. The editorial review process must be supervised by the General Editor and other editors. The Editors will allocate papers to reviewers who possess the necessary expertise and experience to assess them, keep an eye on the caliber of the reviews that are written, and replace reviewers whose works are insufficient or submitted too late.   

The General Editor is empowered to make final editorial decisions regarding assigned manuscripts after weighing comments from the reviewers. The General Editor will be the final arbiter regarding the acceptance of papers when reviewers differ in their evaluations.  The Editors will ensure that the review process is completed in a timely way and that authors receive constructive feedback on papers submitted. The Editors provide the manuscripts accepted for each issue to the publisher for production and online publication. The Editor ensures that the manuscripts are complete, including accurate illustrations, references, and contact information about the authors.

Authors Responsibilities. The responsibilities of authors who wish to publish in JOLAN are based on the criteria set out by the Council of Science Editors. There are summarized as follows:

Confidentiality. Confidentiality is the cornerstone of the author-editor relationship. All correspondence between authors and the journal should be kept private. For any correspondence with the paper during peer review and, if accepted, the publication process, authors should assign a specific contact. Journal policies regarding prepublication embargoes and communication with external peer reviewers should be adhered to by authors. These policies may differ based on whether a journal uses double blind or non-masked peer review method.

Originality.  A statement confirming the uniqueness of the study submitted for review in JOLAN should be included by the authors. Because JOLAN has limited space and Editors may assign low priority to research that do not advance the scientific linguistic enterprise, regardless of their scientific validity and accuracy, originality is essential. Copies of reports on other research (articles, papers, and abstracts) pertaining to the study in question may be requested by certain journals from authors.

Disclosures. It is the duty of authors to be honest when adhering to journal submission guidelines. This includes financial and conflict of interest disclosures, an explanation of an author's true contribution to the study, and disclosure regarding the originality of the content. With their approved work, authors should anticipate that editors will publish all pertinent disclosures. Authors are required by several publications to reveal the funding sources for any studies they choose to publish. All financial sources (government, corporate, and other) and any goods or services (such supplies and equipment, statistical analysis, and scientific writing) that were supplied by outside parties during the study, analysis, or reporting process should be disclosed by the authors. Certain publications have to disclose financial awards in monetary amounts. Employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, expert testimony, and patents are among the things that must be declared.

Copyright. Authors are typically required to grant copyright to the publication that publishes their research. In a legal agreement known as a copyright assignment, authors grant the publisher specific rights. As an alternative, certain publications might employ a licensing contract. These agreements typically provide the authors to maintain certain rights to the content, however specific arrangements may differ. The content in question must be unique and not otherwise protected by copyright elsewhere, either in its entirety or in part. The authors of the study in question should make sure that it is unique and free of plagiarism. In addition, authors must avoid duplicate publication, which is reproducing verbatim content from their other publications. Because it might violate copyright and suggest that the study adds very little to the body of literature, JOLAN does not accept submissions that contain material the authors have already published elsewhere.

Permissions. Reusing previously published data and other copyrighted content is a common desire of authors. When reusing any protected content, the author must adhere to the journal or publisher policies and give due credit. Written consent should be given, and the authors should keep this record. The editor can also ask for a copy of this notice.

Multiple Submissions. It is not appropriate for authors to simultaneously submit a research report to JOLAN and elsewhere, even a peer-reviewed paper that has not yet been officially rejected by JOLAN cannot be submitted to another journal. If authors do not adhere to this criterion, Editors may reject their work as against the rules. Furthermore, copyright may be violated by this approach. Authors must formally notify the Editors of JOLAN where their work is being considered to request that their paper be withdrawn from consideration if they wish to submit it to another journal while it is still being considered in JOLAN. The request for withdrawal must be approved by all coauthors, and the Editor of the journal where the work is being considered must be informed of this agreement.

Reviewers Responsibilities. The reviewers’ roles and responsibilities in JOLAN are based on Council of Science Editors benchmarks which are summarized as follows:

Confidentiality. Unless required and authorized by the General Editor, information under review should not be discussed or shared with anybody outside the review process. Peer-reviewed material is a privileged communication that must be handled with confidentiality, taking care to protect the author's name and body of work. Copies of submitted manuscripts should not be kept by reviewers, and they should not utilize their content knowledge for any purpose unrelated to peer review. Authors have a legitimate expectation that the review process will be kept completely confidential, even if it is anticipated that the Editor and reviewers will have access to the submitted content. A reviewer should consult the General Editor if he or she has any questions concerning the guidelines for including certain reviewers in the review process.

Constructive critique. Reviewer comments should point out the material's strengths, constructively point out its flaws, and suggest areas that require development. If not, the author is unable to identify the shortcomings in the work that was turned in. In order for Editors and authors to comprehend the reasoning behind the remarks, a reviewer should provide a clear explanation and evidence for their conclusions. When a reviewer notices a duplicate publication, they should notify the General Editor immediately and make sure that any previously reported observations or arguments are supported by a pertinent citation. The author's intellectual independence should be respected by the reviewer. All anonymous remarks should be polite and able to bear public inspection, even though reviews are confidential.

Competence. Reviewers have an obligation to inform the editor of their level of competence if they are aware that their knowledge of the manuscript's subject is restricted. Reviewers should only accept an assignment if they possess the necessary knowledge to offer an authoritative evaluation, even though they are not required to be experts in every area of a manuscript's content. Without the necessary experience, a reviewer runs the danger of rejecting a good work or suggesting that a submission with significant flaws be accepted. The reviewer ought to refuse the review in such circumstances.

 Impartiality and integrity. Reviewers' remarks and findings must to be founded on an unbiased, objective analysis of the available data, free from any personal or professional prejudice. Without taking into account the authors' ethnicity, ethnic origin, sex, religion, or citizenship, reviewers should only comment on the paper's scientific excellence, creativity, and writing quality as well as its relevance to the journal's scope and mission. Every attempt should be taken to prevent even the appearance of taking advantage of information received through the review process, and reviewers should not take any financial, personal, scientific, or other advantage of the material made available through the privileged communication of peer review.

Disclosure of conflict of interest. The review method should be set up to reduce the reviewer's perceived or actual bias as much as feasible. Reviewers should either decline to serve as reviewers or report any conflicts of interest to the General Editor and inquire about the best way to resolve them if they could impede an objective review. 

Timeliness and responsiveness. It is the duty of reviewers to act quickly, follow the guidelines for finishing a review, and submit it on time. The review process is compromised if this is not done on time. Every attempt should be made to finish the review in the allotted time. The reviewer should immediately decline to conduct the review if it is not possible to meet the deadline, or they should ask if there is any way to make the timeline work.

Publisher’s Responsibilities

JOLAN publishes both online and hard copies. Hard copies are strictly based on authors’ request.

The publisher sets the rules required to support the JOLAN Editors' editing process, particularly those pertaining to the editors' independence, research ethics, authorship, openness and honesty, peer review procedure, editorial team role, appeals, and complaints. The Publisher adheres to the COPE Best Practice Guidelines and the Code of Conduct for Editors, promotes the integrity of the academic record, and periodically reviews and updates journal policies to reflect possible new developments and COPE recommendations. Any necessary retractions, clarifications, and corrections pertaining to the published articles are published by it. Most importantly, it promptly publishes JOLAN's scholarly works.