This page describes how ASLTL defines and responds to suspected research or publication misconduct, and how it handles corrections, errata, and retractions once concerns have been substantiated. The journal follows the Core Practices and relevant flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Defining Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

•     Fabrication: inventing data, results, or sources that do not exist.

•     Falsification: manipulating data, images, or results so that the research is not accurately represented.

•     Plagiarism: presenting the words, data, or ideas of others as one's own without appropriate attribution (see Plagiarism and AI-Writing Policy).

•     Duplicate or redundant publication: publishing substantially the same work in more than one outlet without disclosure.

•     Undisclosed or inappropriate use of generative AI, including the fabrication of references by an AI tool that are then submitted as genuine.

•     Authorship misconduct: omitting a qualifying author ('ghost authorship'), including a non-qualifying author ('gift authorship'), or listing an author without their consent.

•     Undisclosed conflicts of interest that could reasonably be seen to bias the research or its reporting.

Raising a Concern

Anyone including authors, readers, reviewers, or third parties who has a well-founded concern about possible misconduct relating to a submitted or published ASLTL manuscript may contact the editorial office at ethics@asltl.com, providing as much supporting detail as possible.

Investigation Procedure

1.      The Editor-in-Chief (or a delegated editor with no conflict of interest in the case) conducts an initial assessment of whether the concern merits investigation.

2.      If warranted, the author(s) are given the opportunity to respond to the concern in writing.

3.      Where appropriate, the editor may consult the author's institution, an independent expert, or the editorial board, following relevant COPE flowcharts for the type of concern raised.

4.      The editor reaches a decision for example, that no further action is needed, that a correction is required, that an Expression of Concern should be published while the matter is further investigated, or that the article should be retracted.

5.      The decision and its rationale are communicated to the author(s), and, where the concern was raised externally, to the person who raised it.

Corrections and Errata

Where a published article contains a minor error that does not affect the overall interpretation of the work or the scientific/scholarly validity of the article (for example, a typographical error, an incorrect affiliation, or a missing acknowledgement), the journal will publish a formal correction notice (erratum), linked bidirectionally to the original article. The original article remains online, amended or accompanied by a note directing readers to the correction.

Expressions of Concern

Where credible concerns about a published article's validity or integrity have been raised but the investigation is still ongoing or inconclusive, the journal may publish an Expression of Concern, linked to the original article, explaining the nature of the concern and informing readers that further information will follow.

Retraction

An article may be retracted where the editor concludes, following investigation, that one or more of the following applies: the findings are unreliable due to major error, fabrication, or falsification; the work constitutes plagiarism or duplicate publication; the research was not conducted in accordance with appropriate ethical approvals or consent; or authorship, data, or other core elements of the article were obtained or reported fraudulently.

A retracted article is not removed from the journal's website. Instead, the original PDF/HTML is retained and clearly watermarked or labelled 'RETRACTED', accompanied by a formal retraction notice that explains the reason for retraction, is linked bidirectionally to the original article, and is made freely accessible.

Appeals

Authors who are the subject of a misconduct finding, correction, or retraction decision may appeal in writing to the Editor-in-Chief, setting out the grounds for appeal. Where the Editor-in-Chief was directly involved in the original decision, the appeal will be considered by another senior member of the editorial board to ensure an independent review.

Confidentiality

Investigations into alleged misconduct are conducted as confidentially as possible, consistent with the need to gather information and reach a fair decision, in order to protect the interests of all parties until a conclusion is reached.