Publication Ethics

To maintain the quality of the manuscript and avoid publishing / plagiarism violations in the publishing process, the editorial board establishes the ethics of scientific publication for International Journal on Language, Research and Education Studies (IJLRES). The ethical rules of this publication apply to writers / authors, editors, reviewers, and managers of journals / editors. The ethics of the publication refer to The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Author Ethics

  1. Reporting; the writer must provide honest, clear and comprehensive information about the process and results of his research to the editors, and keep his research data properly and safely.
  2. Originality and plagiarism; the writer must ensure that the manuscript that has been sent / submitted to the editor is the original manuscript, written by himself, sourced from his own ideas and ideas, and not to copy the writings or ideas / ideas of others. Authors are strictly prohibited from naming the reference sources cited to other people's names.
  3. Repeat shipping; the author must inform that the manuscript sent / submitted to the editor is a manuscript that has never been sent / submitted to the journal publisher / other publications. If a redundancy is found in sending the manuscript to another publisher, the editor will reject the manuscript sent by the author.
  4. Author status; the writer must inform the editor that the writer has competence or qualifications in certain fields of expertise in accordance with the field of publication science, namely librarianship. The author who sent the manuscript to the editor was the first author (co-author) so that if found a problem in the process of publishing the manuscript can be resolved immediately.
  5. Error writing the script; the writer must immediately inform the editor if an error is found in writing the script, both the results of the review and the edit. Writing errors include writing the name, affiliation / agency, quotations, and other writings that can reduce the meaning and susbtansi of the manuscript. If that happens, the writer must immediately propose improvements to the manuscript.
  6. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; the writer must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the manuscript can be processed smoothly and safely.

Editor's Ethics

  1. Decision of publication; editors must ensure that the review process of the manuscript is comprehensive, transparent, objective, fair and wise. This is the basis for the editor in making decisions on a text, rejected or accepted. In this case, the editorial board acts as the manuscript selection team.
  2. Information publication; editors must ensure that writing guidelines for writers and other interested parties can be accessed and read clearly, both in print and electronic versions.
  3. Distribution of peer-reviewed manuscripts; the editor must ensure the reviewer and material of the manuscript for review, as well as clearly inform the reviewer of the terms and process of the manuscript.
  4. Objectivity and neutrality; the editor must be objective, neutral, and honest in editing the manuscript, regardless of gender, business side, ethnicity, religion, race, ethnicity, and author's citizenship.
  5. Confidentiality; editors must maintain all information properly, especially those related to the privacy of the author and the distribution of the manuscript.
  6. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; editors must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the process of publishing manuscripts runs smoothly and safely.


Reviewer Ethics

  1. Objectivity and neutrality; the reviewer must be honest, objective, unbiased, independent, and only in favor of scientific truth. The process of studying the manuscripts is done professionally without distinguishing gender, business side, ethnicity, religion, race, inter-group, and citizenship of the author.
  2. Clarity of reference sources; the reviewer must ensure that the source of reference / citation of the manuscript is appropriate and credible (accountable). If errors or deviations are found in writing the reference / quote source, the reviewer must immediately inform the editor to make corrections by the author according to the note of the reviewer.
  3. Peer-review effectiveness; The reviewer must respond to the manuscript that has been sent by the editor and work according to the set of peer-reviewed manuscripts (maximum 2 weeks). If additional time is needed in the review of the manuscript, it must immediately report (confirmation) to the editorial secretariat.
  4. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; The reviewer must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the process of publishing a manuscript runs smoothly and safely.

Journal Management Ethics

  1. Decision-making; the manager of the journal / editorial board must describe the mission and objectives of the organization, especially those relating to policy making and journal publishing decisions without any particular interest.
  2. Freedom; journal managers must provide reviewers and editors with freedom to create a comfortable work environment and respect the privacy of writers.
  3. Warranties and promotions; Journal managers must guarantee and protect intellectual property rights (copyrights), and be transparent in managing funds received by third parties. In addition, the journal manager must publish and promote the results of the publication to the public by providing guarantees of benefits in the use of the manuscript.
  4. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; Journal managers must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the process of publishing manuscripts runs smoothly and safely.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in IJLRES is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.  

English Language Center of the State Islamic University of North Sumatra as publisher of IJLRES takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. 

Publication decisions

The editor of IJLRES is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.


Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.