Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics (PJL) is a peer-reviewed electronic international journal. This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher (Universitas Sebelas Maret).

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed PJL journal 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.

It is strictly against the ethics of academic article publication for duplication of publication, as such, manuscripts to be submitted to PJL MUST NOT been published and is/are not undergoing processing for publication in any other journal. It is mandatory for contributors (authors) to give a written declaration that a submitted work has not been previously published and is not being considered for publication elsewhere. As a result of our commitment to ensure that all submissions are original, the Editorial Offices of our journals are saddled with the responsibility to cross-check as a way of ensuring that submitted articles have not been published prior to their submission to our journals.

There is limit to the extent that Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics can investigate misconduct of our contributors, as such, we call on external reviewers and the entire science community to report any misconduct to our help desk officer through prasastijournal@gmail.com for prompt action to be taken.

Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics publishes 'retractions' if work is proven to be fraudulent, or 'expressions of concern' if editors have well-founded suspicion of misconduct. Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics also publishes 'replacement' in the cases where the article, if acted upon, might pose a serious risk, the authors of the original article may wish to retract the flawed original and replace it with a corrected version. In these circumstances the procedures for retraction will be followed with the difference that the database retraction notice will publish a link to the corrected re-published article and a history of the document.

Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics encourages correspondence commenting on published items and should always invite authors to respond to any correspondence before publication. However, authors do not have a right to veto unfavorable comments about their work and they may choose not to respond to criticisms.

Neither peer-reviewer comments nor published correspondence should contain personal attacks on the authors. Editors should encourage peer reviewers to criticize the work not the researcher and should edit (or reject) letters containing personal or offensive statements.

Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics editors and readers have the right to expect that submitted work is the author's own, that it has not been plagiarized (i.e. taken from other authors without permission, if permission is required or proper citation of the original work) and that copyright has not been breached (for example, if figures or tables are reproduced).
The editorial office of Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics encourages peer reviewers to destroy manuscripts sent to them for review after they have reviewed them. The guidelines to peer reviewers for our journals are explicit about the roles and responsibilities of peer reviewers, in particular the need to treat submitted material in confidence until it has been published.

Authors of Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics must adhere to the following guidelines:

• That the award of authorship should balance intellectual contributions to the conception, design, analysis and writing of the study against the collection of data and other routine work. If there is no task that can reasonably be attributed to a particular individual, then that individual should not be credited with authorship.
• Authors must declare that the work reported is their own and that they are the copyright owner (or else have obtained the copyright owner's permission).
• Authors must declare that the submitted work and its essential substance have not previously been published and are not being considered for publication elsewhere. Only original (unpublished) manuscripts should be submitted.
• Author(s) must avoid disputes over attribution of academic credit for it is helpful to decide early on in the planning of a research project who will be credited as corresponding author, as contributors, and who will be acknowledged.
• All authors must take public responsibility for the content of their paper. The multidisciplinary nature of much research can make this difficult, but this can be resolved by the disclosure of individual contributions. Careful reading of the target journal’s “Advice to Authors” is advised, in the light of current uncertainties.
• It is unethical to submit a manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.
• Any conflict of interest must be clearly stated.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 behaviour and is unacceptable.
• Author(s) must acknowledge the sources of data used in the development of the manuscript. Also should endeavour to acknowledge sources of financial support to the research if any.
• All errors discovered in the manuscript after submission must be quickly communicated to the Editor.
• Author(s) should state that the study they are submitting was approved by the relevant research ethics committee or institutional review board. If human participants were involved, manuscripts must be accompanied by a statement that the experiments were undertaken with the understanding and appropriate informed consent of each. If experimental animals were used, the materials and methods (experimental procedures) section must clearly indicate that appropriate measures were taken to minimize pain or discomfort, and details of animal care should be provided.
• Authors should submit a short description of all contributions to their manuscript. Each author's contribution should be described in brief. Authors of research papers should state whether they had complete access to the study data that support the publication. Contributors who do not qualify as authors should also be listed and their particular contribution described. This information should appear as an acknowledgement.
• Author(s) should include information about research funding in all papers they prepare for publication.
• Authors should inform journals if they discover errors in published work.
• Authors have a right to appeal editorial decisions.

Reviewers of Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics must adhere to the following guidelines:

• That all manuscripts are reviewed in fairness based on the intellectual content of the paper regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, religion, citizenry nor political values of author(s).
• That any observed conflict of interest during the review process must be communicated to the Editor-in-chief.
• That all information pertaining to the manuscript is kept confidential.
• That any information that may be the reason for the rejection of publication of a manuscript must be communicated to the Editor.
• The duty of confidentiality in the assessment of a manuscript must be maintained by expert reviewers, and this extends to reviewers’ colleagues who may be asked (with the editor’s permission) to give opinions on specific sections.
• The submitted manuscript should not be retained or copied.
• Reviewers and editors should not make any use of the data, arguments, or interpretations, unless they have the authors’ permission.
• Reviewers should provide speedy, accurate, courteous, unbiased and justifiable reports.

• The reviewers assigned to an article will comment on the following items:

• The importance, originality, and timeliness of the study,

• Writing, organization, and presentation,
• The relevance, usefulness, and comprehensibility of the article for the Journal’s target audience,
• title, abstract, and headings describe topic of the article.
• The length of article & reference.

Editors of Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics must adhere to the following guidelines:

• Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based only on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the remit of the journal.
• Editors must treat all submitted papers as confidential.
• Editors should inform peer reviewers about this Misconduct.
• Editors should encourage peer reviewers to consider ethical issues raised by the research they are reviewing
• Editors should request additional information from authors if they feel this is required.
• Editors should exercise sensitivity when publishing images of objects that might have cultural significance or cause offence.
• Editors should inform readers if ethical breaches have occurred.
• Editors should encourage peer reviewers to identify if they have a conflict of interest with the material they are being asked to review, and editors should ask that peer reviewers decline invitations requesting peer review where any circumstances might prevent them producing fair peer review.
• Editors may choose to use peer reviewers suggested by authors, but should not consider suggestions made by authors as binding.
• Editors should mediate all exchanges between authors and peer reviewers during the peer-review process (i.e. prior to publication). If agreement cannot be reached, editors should consider inviting comments from additional peer reviewer(s), if the editor feels that this would be helpful. Journals should consider stating in their guidelines that the editor's decision following such an appeal is final.
• Decisions by editors about whether to publish individual items submitted to a journal should not be influenced by pressure from the editor's employer, the journal owner or the publisher.
• Editors should publish corrections if errors are discovered that could affect the interpretation of data or information presented in an article.
• Editors should expect allegations of theft or plagiarism to be substantiated, and should treat allegations of theft or plagiarism seriously.
• Editors should protect peer reviewers from authors and, even if peer reviewer identities are revealed, should discourage authors from contacting peer reviewers directly, especially if misconduct is suspected.
• Editors should reserve the right to reject papers if there is doubt whether appropriate procedures have been followed. If a paper has been submitted from a country where there is no ethics committee, institutional review board, or similar review and approval, editors should use their own experience to judge whether the paper should be published. If the decision is made to publish a paper under these circumstances a short statement should be included to explain the situation.
• Editors should aim to ensure timely peer review and publication for papers they receive, especially where, to the extent that this can be predicted, findings may have important implications.
• The editor of the PJL journal 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 Editorial Board takes responsibility for making publication decisions for submitted manuscripts based on the reviewer’s evaluation of the manuscript, policies of the journal editorial board and legal restrain acting against plagiarism, libel and copyright infringement. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Chief Editor of Prasasti: Journal of Linguistics must adhere to the following guidelines:

1. Evaluate manuscripts fairly and solely on their intellectual merit.
2. Ensure confidentiality of manuscripts and not disclose any information regarding manuscripts to anyone other than the people involved in the publishing process.
3. Has the responsibility to decide when and which articles are to be published.
4. Actively seek the views of board members, reviewers and authors on how to improve/ increase the image and visibility of the journal.
5. Give clear instructions to potential contributors on the submission process and what is expected of the authors.
6. Ensure appropriate reviewers are selected/ identified for the reviewing process

PLAGIARISM

Authors should submit only original work that is not plagiarized, and has not been published or being considered elsewhere. Appropriate softwares may be used by the editorial office to check for similarities of submitted manuscripts with existing literature. Inclusion of fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unacceptable. Work and/or words from other publications must be appropriately cited or quoted.

REPORTING

Authors should state their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.The methods used in the work should be clearly and unambiguously described so that the findings can be repeated and confirmed by other researchers.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

A statement on conflict of interest must be included in the manuscript if authors receive any support that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

AUTHORSHIP AND COLLABORATION

Name of authors listed in a paper should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the report. Only those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the work must be acknowledged or listed as contributors. It is the duty of the corresponding author to ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper. All co-authors must approve the final version of the paper and agree to the version of the paper before submission.

MULTIPLE OR REDUNDANT

Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research output in more than one journal or primary publication. A similar manuscript should not be submitted to more than one journal concurrently as this constitutes as unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

POST-PUBLICATION INTEGRITY

All parties involved in the journal’s publication process (Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher) must adhere to the Core Practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Below are the explicit policies and operational procedures regarding specific ethical violations and post-publication integrity.

1. Citation Manipulation

2. Definition: Citation manipulation includes, but is not limited to: coercive citation (editors or reviewers forcing authors to cite specific, irrelevant papers to boost journal/reviewer metrics), citation cartels (groups of authors/journals excessively citing each other without academic justification), and excessive, unjustified self-citation.

3. Operational Procedure:

   • The Editorial Board routinely screens reference lists for anomalous citation patterns.
   • If suspicious citation practices are detected, the Editor will request a written justification from the authors.
   • If the manipulation is confirmed and unjustified, the manuscript will be rejected. If discovered post-publication, the journal will issue a Correction or Retraction in accordance with COPE guidelines.

4. Peer Review Manipulation

5. Definition: Any attempt to compromise the integrity of the blind peer-review process. This includes: authors suggesting fake reviewers (using fabricated names or personal email addresses disguised as institutional ones), authors reviewing their own manuscripts via alternate accounts, or reviewers colluding with authors to guarantee acceptance.

6. Operational Procedure:

   • Prevention: Authors may suggest reviewers, but only with valid, verifiable institutional email addresses. The Editorial Office independently verifies the identity and affiliation of all suggested reviewers.
   • Action: Any confirmed attempt at peer review manipulation will result in the immediate desk rejection of the manuscript. The author(s) and/or reviewer(s) involved will be blacklisted from future submissions or reviewing for this journal, and their home institution may be notified of the ethical breach.

7. Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections

8. Definition: The journal encourages scholarly discourse and the correction of the scientific record after an article is published. This includes addressing honest errors, identifying overlooked data, or raising formal concerns about research integrity.

9. Operational Procedure:

   • Readers or authors may raise concerns by submitting a formal "Letter to the Editor" or an Ethics Complaint (see Reporting Channels below).
   • The Editorial Board will assess the claim impartially. If the concern is valid, the journal will follow COPE’s flowchart for post-publication discussions.
   • Depending on the severity of the issue, the journal will publish an Erratum/Correction (for honest, minor errors), an Expression of Concern (while an investigation is ongoing), or a formal Retraction (for severe ethical breaches, plagiarism, or fabricated data). All notices will be prominently linked to the original article and clearly state the reason for the action.

10. Reporting Channels and Handling Procedures

To ensure transparency and accountability, the journal has established a formal mechanism for reporting ethical concerns.

• Reporting Channel: Any suspected ethical violations (by authors, reviewers, or editors) should be reported in writing with supporting evidence to the Editor-in-Chief or the dedicated ethics contact at: [Insert Official Email, e.g., pjl.ethics@uns.ac.id or editor.pjl@uns.ac.id].
• Conflict of Interest (COI) Free Handling: All ethics complaints will be handled by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated independent Ethics Committee. Any editorial board member with a personal, professional, or institutional Conflict of Interest regarding the complaint will be immediately recused from the investigation and decision-making process.
• Investigation and Decision Flow:
  1. Acknowledgment: The complainant will receive an acknowledgment of receipt within 7 working days.
  2. Preliminary Assessment: The Editor will determine if the claim warrants a formal investigation.
  3. Formal Investigation: The accused party (e.g., the author) will be contacted and given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations with evidence.
  4. Decision: Based on the evidence and COPE guidelines, the Editorial Board will make a final decision.
  5. Action & Notification: The appropriate action (rejection, correction, retraction, or dismissal of the claim) will be executed, and all involved parties (complainant, author, institution) will be formally notified of the outcome.