Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Literary Voice is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and integrity. We adhere to the principles outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and ensure that all stages of the publication process—from submission to final publication—are conducted with transparency, fairness, and accountability. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to follow these ethical guidelines to maintain the credibility and quality of the journal.

Ethics Policy

1. Authorship and Originality

   - Authors must ensure that their submissions are original and have not been published previously, either in whole or in part. 

   - Submissions must not be under consideration for publication elsewhere. 

   - Proper acknowledgment of the work and ideas of others must be provided through appropriate citations and references. 

   - All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission to Literary Voice. 

2. Plagiarism and Copyright

   - Authors must avoid plagiarism in all forms, including self-plagiarism. 

   - Any use of copyrighted material (e.g., text, images, data) must be accompanied by written permission from the copyright holder. 

   - Authors are responsible for ensuring that their work does not infringe on the intellectual property rights of others. 

3. Data Integrity and Reproducibility

   - Authors must present accurate and reliable data in their submissions. 

   - Fabrication, falsification, or misrepresentation of data is considered unethical and will result in immediate rejection of the manuscript. 

   - Authors should be prepared to provide access to raw data if requested by the editorial team. 

4. Conflicts of Interest

   - Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest that could influence the research or its interpretation. 

   - Conflicts of interest may include financial, personal, or professional relationships that could be perceived as biasing the work. 

5. Ethical Approval

   - For studies involving human or animal subjects, authors must provide evidence of ethical approval from an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee. 

   - Authors must ensure that all research is conducted in accordance with relevant ethical guidelines and regulations. 

Editorial Responsibilities

1. Fair and Objective Review

   - The editorial team ensures that all submissions are evaluated fairly and objectively, based on their academic merit and relevance to the journal’s scope. 

   - Decisions to accept or reject a manuscript are made without regard to the authors’ race, gender, nationality, or institutional affiliation. 

2. Confidentiality

   - Editors and reviewers must treat all submissions as confidential. 

   - Information about a manuscript must not be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, or editorial team. 

3. Transparency and Accountability

   - The editorial team is committed to addressing any ethical concerns or complaints raised about published work. 

   - In cases of suspected misconduct, the journal will follow COPE guidelines to investigate and resolve the issue. 

Reviewer Responsibilities

1. Timely and Constructive Feedback

   - Reviewers are expected to provide timely, constructive, and unbiased feedback on submissions. 

   - Reviews should be based on the quality and originality of the work, not on personal opinions or preferences. 

2. Conflicts of Interest

   - Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could affect their ability to provide an impartial evaluation. 

   - If a conflict of interest is identified, the reviewer should decline to review the manuscript. 

3. Confidentiality

   - Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the peer review process and not use any information from the manuscript for personal gain. 

Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest (COI) exists when any participant in the publication process has a competing interest that could — or could reasonably be perceived to — compromise objectivity, integrity, or trust in the research, its review, or its editorial handling. Conflicts of interest can be financial, academic/intellectual, personal/relational, institutional and political/ideological. In such a case all parties should err on the side of disclosure:

Editors must oversee peer review objectively and maintain independence in editorial decisions, and (a) Must not handle manuscripts where a personal, academic, institutional, or financial conflict of interest exists; (b) Must recuse themselves immediately if they are authors/co-authors, recent collaborators (within the past 3 years), close colleagues, family members, or otherwise have a relationship that may affect judgment; (c) Must not participate in editorial decisions for manuscripts submitted by authors from the editor’s own institution or department; (d) Must delegate editorial responsibility to another qualified and independent editor when a conflict arises; and Must not use information obtained through the editorial process for their own research, publications, or any other personal or professional advantage. Where a conflict is identified at any stage, the journal will reassign the manuscript to an independent editor or take other appropriate editorial action to preserve integrity.

Guest Editors (thematic/special issues), are subject to the same COI requirements as regular editors. Additionally, (a) Guest editors must not handle manuscripts authored or co-authored by themselves, their close collaborators, or individuals from their own institution. Such manuscripts must be managed by an independent editor (typically the Editor-in-Chief or a designated associate editor), (b) Guest editors must declare all potential conflicts of interest to the Editor-in-Chief before the review process begins. The Editor-in-Chief retains final decision-making authority for all articles in thematic issues.

Reviewers ust evaluate manuscripts impartially and in confidence, they (a) Must decline review invitations when a conflict exists (e.g., personal relationships, financial ties, competitive research interests, institutional affiliation with the authors, supervisor–student relationship, or recent substantial collaboration); (b) Should notify the handling editor if uncertain whether a relationship constitutes a conflict; (c) Must not use confidential information obtained during peer review for personal advantage or to disadvantage others; (d) Must not accept review assignments for manuscripts in which they have a financial, personal, or intellectual stake in the outcome. To support transparency, Literary Voice does not normally invite reviewers from the same institution as the authors. Reviewers are asked to declare any potential conflicts of interest when responding to a review invitation.

Authors must disclose all relationships and conditions that may constitute conflicts of interest. Specifically, authors must (a) Declare any financial, institutional, personal, or professional relationships that could influence — or appear to influence — the research, its design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or reporting; (b) Disclose all funding sources, including the name(s) of the funding organisation(s), grant/award number(s), and the role of the funder in the study (e.g., study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or manuscript preparation). If the funder had no role, this should be explicitly stated; (c) Provide a clear Conflict of Interest statement during submission via the journal system and on the Title Page; (d) and ensure that authorship reflects genuine contributions, consistent with Literary Voice’s policies. If no conflicts exist, authors must include the following statement: “The author(s) declare no conflict of interest.” If no external funding was received, authors must include the following statement: “This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.”

 

- Errors and Corrections: If errors are identified in a published article, the journal will issue a correction or retraction as appropriate. 

- Retractions: In cases of serious ethical violations or significant errors, the journal may retract the article and notify readers of the retraction. 

- Appeals: Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a detailed explanation of their concerns. Appeals will be reviewed by the editorial team and handled in accordance with COPE guidelines. 

Commitment to Ethical Publishing

Literary Voice is dedicated to fostering a culture of integrity and accountability in academic publishing. By adhering to these ethical guidelines, we aim to ensure the trust and confidence of our authors, reviewers, and readers. 

For further information or to report ethical concerns, please contact the editorial team at lvonline22@gmail.com.