CODE OF ETHICS

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

TAPSLA Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition follows the principles of publication ethics and publication malpractice statement mainly based on the Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011, download PDF) Additionally, in order to spell out the procedures applied by the editors in any case involving any form of malpractice, the editors accept the flowcharts published by the Committee on Publication Ethics on their website https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts, both in their English and Polish language versions.

Responsibilities of the Editor

1. The editor holds responsibility for the decision as to which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published.
2. The editor shall not consider the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy as pertinent to the selection of the text for publication.
3. The sole criteria for the selection of the text shall include: 
   - the submission’s relevance to the field of study and to the scope of the journal
   - the submission's originality
   - the quality of the submission's language
   - the clarity of the argument 
   - observance of all legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

Confidentiality
Until the moment of the admission of the article for publication, the editor and any editorial staff shall not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to any third party other than:

• corresponding Author
• peer referees
• members of the editorial team
• the publisher
• copyeditors, proofreaders, typesetters involved in the production of the journal
  as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest 
(please, consult the  PLoS Policy to identify potential competing interests)

Unpublished original material submitted to the journal shall never be used by the Editor or any party privy to the material prior to its publication (listed in the "Confidentiality" section of this document above) for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.

Referee's responsibilities

1. The peer referee shall provide the Editors with information that will allow them to make an informed decision concerning the publication of the material.
2. The peer referee shall provide the Author with relevant information allowing him or her to revise her contribution to meet the highest standards of academic quality or to improve their writing in the future.
3. The peer referee shall deliver his or her review promptly or shall notify the Editor about any circumstances that prevent him or her from the timely delivery of the review.
4. The peer referee shall be impartial in their evaluation of the submission.
5. The peer referee shall express his or her views clearly and unambiguously.
6. The peer referee shall never use ad-hominem arguments.
7. The peer referee shall not use the reference to strengthen their own academic or professional status.
8. The peer referee shall disclose to the Editor any conflict of interest (please, consult the  PLoS Policy to identify potential competing interests). The peer referee shall decline the reference upon the discovery of any conflict of interest and shall inform the Editor about such instances.
9. The peer referee shall treat received documents as confidential.
10. The referee is obliged to identify insufficient identification of sources or potential plagiarism, of which cases the referee shall notify the Editor.

Author's Responsibilities and Obligations

1. Authors shall present original research.
2. Authors shall offer honest and precise descriptions of their research procedures.
3. Authors shall present reliable and intersubjectively verifiable data.
4. Authors shall provide full and honest list of references, crediting all other researchers and other authors whose work has made the submission possible.
5. Authors shall never submit contributions including fradulent data or misrepresented statements.
6. Authors shall offer an impartial, methodologically sound, discussion of the data. 
7. Upon request, Authors shall provide raw data for assessment of the Editorial Board supported by an expert in the field represented by the contribution, and shall be prepared to make the data available publically if necessary (if laws allow it and individual, including proprietary and confidentiality rights, are not imperiled).
8. Authors shall submit only and exclusively original work, duly quoting and properly crediting work of others, including works belonging to the canon of the discipline that have influenced the overall orientation of the research presented. 
9. Authors shall NEVER submit plagiarized work, be it a plagiarism based on uncredited translation, uncredited citation or reference to someone else's unpublished work, or ideas knowingly harvested from others, including students, whose unpublished work remains THEIRS. 
10. Submitting Authors agree that plagiarism is not only a crime, but also the most degrading act in the space of academia and therefore shall take special care that no part of their work should leave any doubt in terms of academic honesty.
11. Authors shall properly cite their sources, credit their mentors and other authors, and document their data with reliable and verifiable source references.
12. Authors shall not submit material published previously elsewhere, except by explicit invitation of the Editors, who see the reprint of already copyrighted material as important to the overall concept of the issue.
13. Submitting the same paper to a number of journals shall be considered unethical, therefore Authors shall not submit contributions considered for review in TAPSLA elsewhere. 
14. Submitting material to TAPSLA, Authors retain the rights to the published material. 
15. If their work is accepted and published,  Authors retain the right to the published material, permitting the use of their work under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution - Share Alike (CC BY-SA 4.0).
16. Authorship shall be limited to Individuals who made a significant contribution to the study submitted to TAPSLA, whether in terms of data, conception, methodology, or execution of research. All individuals who did perform work substantial to the contribution shall be given proper credit as co-authors irrespective of their status in the academic hierarchy, assistants and students being thus no exception.
17. No uninvolved individuals shall be listed among the Authors or Co-Authors of the submission.
18. All Authors shall disclose instance of the conflict of interest to the Editors, especially financial or other substantive interests that might influence the results of research or interpretation of data.
19. Authors shall report any fundamental errors or inacurracies that could not have been verified by referees or editors to the Editors, requesting an erratum.

Based on: 
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from <http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct>