Journal ethics
(based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

The publication of articles in the double blind peer-reviewed journal Logos et Littera: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Text aims to contribute to the process of permanent knowledge improvement and advancing research and knowledge in linguistics and literature. The articles published employ and embody the scientific method. This is why it is important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, journal editors and reviewers.

1. Duties of authors

• Reporting standards
Articles should contain and present:
- an accurate account of the work conducted,
- objective discussion of its importance,
- accurate data,
- sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.

Fraudulent and knowingly inaccurate statements represent unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

• Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data from the paper for editorial review and retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

• Originality and plagiarism
Articles should be entirely original works and, if the authors have used the work and words of others, cite and quote them properly.

Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and unacceptable.

• Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
An author should not publish manuscripts describing the same research in more than one publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is unethical and unacceptable.

An author should not submit for consideration a previously published paper.

• Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Information obtained privately may not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.

• Authorship of the paper
Authorship ought to be limited to those who have made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the findings. All those who have made such significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Others who have participated in certain aspects of the research project ought to be acknowledged as contributors.

• Fundamental errors in published works
If an author discovers a substantial error in the published work, they have to promptly inform the journal editors and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper.

• AI policy
We acknowledge a dynamic development of AI-based tools and technologies (such as LLMs, chatbots, GenAI). Furthermore, we acknowledge that responsible, appropriate and transparent use of AI has the potential to contribute to research progress.
Authors are responsible for the originality, validity and integrity of their submissions. Therefore, AI must not be listed as an author. However, when AI tools are used, this use must be acknowledged. Inappropriate use of Generative AI includes the generation of incorrect text or content, plagiarism or inappropriate attribution to prior sources. This may serve as the basis for rejecting the submission.

2. Duties of editors

• Publication decisions
The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.

• Fair play
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.

• Confidentiality
The editor may not disclose any information about a submitted paper to anyone other than the corresponding author and reviewers.

• Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper may not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

• Cooperation in investigations
An editor should take responsive measures when ethical complaints are presented regarding a submitted or published paper. Such measures generally include contacting the author and giving due consideration of the complaint made. If the complaint is upheld, a correction, retraction or an expression of concern may be published.

3. Duties of reviewers

• Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer reviewer assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

• Promptness
Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review a paper or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

• Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

• Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively.

• Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers ought to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also point to 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
Unpublished data disclosed in a submitted paper may not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author.

• AI policy
Reviewers should assess submissions with awareness of AI-generated content, ensuring that authors have transparently disclosed any AI assistance in research, analysis, or writing. Reviewers suspecting the inappropriate or undisclosed use of generative AI in a submission should inform the Journal Editor about their concerns.

Reviewers who choose to use AI tools during the review process must do so responsibly, ensuring that AI assistance does not replace their critical judgment or expertise. Reviewers must not use AI to generate review reports in full or rely on it for confidential manuscript content processing. Additionally, they should avoid inputting any unpublished or sensitive manuscript details into AI systems, maintaining strict confidentiality and ethical integrity. If AI is used in any capacity, reviewers should disclose its role to the journal editor.

4. Guidelines for retracting articles

The journal abides by the COPE Retraction Guidelines.