Plagiarism and AI Policy

Liberal Journal of Language and Literature Review

The Liberal Journal of Language and Literature Review is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity, originality, transparency, and responsible research conduct. This policy establishes the journal’s requirements concerning plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, and the ethical use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in scholarly research and publication.

The policy applies to all authors, reviewers, editors, and other contributors involved in the publication process.

1. Plagiarism Policy

1.1 Definition of Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the presentation of another person’s words, ideas, data, interpretations, concepts, or other intellectual work as one’s own without appropriate acknowledgment. Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

a. Direct Plagiarism
Copying words, sentences, paragraphs, or substantial portions of another work without quotation and appropriate citation.

b. Mosaic or Patchwork Plagiarism
Combining, rearranging, or minimally modifying material from one or more sources while retaining the original wording, structure, or ideas without adequate attribution.

c. Self-Plagiarism and Redundant Publication
Reusing substantial portions of one’s previously published work, including text, data, analyses, or findings, without appropriate disclosure, citation, or justification.

d. Inadequate Paraphrasing
Restating another author’s ideas with wording or structure that remains excessively close to the original source without appropriate attribution.

e. Idea, Data, and Conceptual Plagiarism
Using another researcher’s unpublished or published ideas, hypotheses, interpretations, methodologies, datasets, or findings without proper acknowledgment or authorization where required.

1.2 Similarity Screening

All submitted manuscripts may be subjected to similarity screening at the editorial or peer-review stage using recognized plagiarism-detection or similarity-checking services, such as iThenticate, Turnitin, or equivalent systems.

A similarity report is considered an editorial screening tool rather than definitive evidence of plagiarism. The editorial team will assess the nature, source, context, and location of identified similarities, including legitimate quotations, references, technical terminology, standard methodological expressions, and other unavoidable overlaps.

As a general editorial benchmark:

  • Overall similarity: normally should not exceed 15–20%, excluding references and legitimate quotations.

  • Similarity from a single source: normally should not exceed 3–5%.

These percentages are guidelines, not automatic acceptance or rejection thresholds. The final determination rests with the Editor-in-Chief or designated editorial authority following substantive assessment of the manuscript.

1.3 Procedures for Suspected Plagiarism

Minor or Unintentional Similarity:
Where similarity appears limited and may result from inadequate citation or paraphrasing, authors may be requested to revise the manuscript and provide appropriate attribution.

Substantial or Deliberate Plagiarism:
Where substantial unattributed material, fabricated attribution, systematic copying, or other serious misconduct is identified, the manuscript may be rejected without further consideration. Depending on the circumstances, the journal may also restrict future submissions for an appropriate period.

Plagiarism Discovered After Publication:
If credible evidence of plagiarism emerges after publication, the journal will conduct an appropriate investigation. Depending on the findings and severity of the case, the journal may:

  • Issue a correction or clarification;

  • Retract the article;

  • Publish a formal retraction notice;

  • Notify relevant institutions or research authorities where appropriate; and

  • Take other measures consistent with recognized publication-ethics standards.

2. Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

The Liberal Journal of Language and Literature Review recognizes that AI-assisted technologies are increasingly used in academic research, writing, editing, translation, coding, and other scholarly activities. The journal does not prohibit the responsible use of AI tools; however, their use must remain ethical, transparent, accountable, and subject to meaningful human oversight.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and scholarly validity of their submissions, regardless of whether AI tools were used.

2.1 Permitted Uses of AI

Authors may use AI-based tools, where appropriate, for limited and responsible purposes, including:

  • Grammar, spelling, and language improvement;

  • Stylistic and readability enhancement;

  • Translation or language assistance;

  • Brainstorming and development of preliminary research ideas;

  • Assistance with coding, programming, or computational tasks;

  • Assistance with formatting or organization; and

  • Other legitimate research-support activities that do not replace the authors’ intellectual contribution.

Authors must independently verify all AI-assisted outputs before incorporating them into a manuscript.

2.2 Prohibited or Unacceptable Uses of AI

Authors must not use AI tools in a manner that compromises academic integrity. Unacceptable practices include:

  • Presenting AI-generated content as original scholarly work without appropriate disclosure;

  • Generating or fabricating data, results, references, citations, quotations, or sources;

  • Using AI to fabricate or manipulate research findings;

  • Submitting AI-generated analysis, interpretations, or conclusions without meaningful author review and intellectual responsibility;

  • Using AI to disguise, manipulate, or conceal plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct;

  • Generating false references or unverifiable scholarly claims; and

  • Delegating substantial intellectual or scholarly responsibility for the manuscript to an AI system.

AI tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors because they cannot assume responsibility, provide accountability, or meet the requirements of authorship.

2.3 AI Disclosure Requirement

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI or other substantive AI-assisted tools when such use has materially contributed to the preparation, analysis, or development of the manuscript.

The disclosure should identify:

  1. The name of the AI tool or system;

  2. The purpose for which it was used; and

  3. The nature and extent of its contribution.

A suitable disclosure may read:

“The authors used [name of AI tool] for [specific purpose, e.g., language editing and preliminary idea generation]. The authors independently reviewed and verified the output and retain full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, interpretation, and final content of the manuscript.”

Routine use of basic spelling or grammar functions may be treated differently where it does not involve substantive generation or transformation of scholarly content; however, authors should disclose substantive AI assistance whenever required by the journal.

2.4 Verification and Editorial Assessment

The journal may use appropriate technological tools and editorial procedures to identify potential plagiarism, fabricated content, undisclosed AI use, or other forms of publication misconduct.

Where concerns arise, the journal may:

  • Request clarification or additional information from the authors;

  • Request original research materials, datasets, notes, or documentation where appropriate;

  • Conduct additional editorial or peer-review assessment;

  • Request revision or disclosure; or

  • Reject or withdraw a manuscript where serious ethical concerns remain unresolved.

AI-detection software will not, by itself, constitute conclusive evidence of misconduct. Editorial decisions will be based on the totality of available evidence and appropriate scholarly judgment.

3. Author Responsibilities

Authors are responsible for ensuring that:

  • The submitted manuscript is original and has been prepared in accordance with accepted standards of academic integrity;

  • All sources, quotations, ideas, data, and intellectual contributions are appropriately acknowledged;

  • Previously published material is properly disclosed and cited;

  • Research data and findings are authentic, accurate, and verifiable;

  • AI-assisted content is critically reviewed and fact-checked;

  • AI-generated or AI-assisted material is disclosed where required by this policy;

  • AI tools are not used to fabricate information, references, data, or results;

  • Appropriate permissions are obtained for copyrighted or otherwise protected material; and

  • All statements concerning AI use and research integrity are complete and truthful.

4. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers should:

  • Maintain confidentiality regarding manuscripts under review;

  • Identify and report suspected plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, fabricated material, or other ethical concerns;

  • Avoid using AI tools to process confidential manuscript content unless expressly permitted by the journal and consistent with applicable confidentiality requirements;

  • Provide objective, evidence-based, and constructive evaluations; and

  • Notify the editorial office promptly when serious ethical concerns are identified.

5. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for:

  • Ensuring that manuscripts are screened appropriately for originality and ethical compliance;

  • Evaluating similarity reports in their academic context rather than relying solely on numerical thresholds;

  • Investigating credible allegations of plagiarism or inappropriate AI use;

  • Maintaining confidentiality and procedural fairness;

  • Giving authors an appropriate opportunity to respond to substantive allegations where warranted; and

  • Taking proportionate editorial action in accordance with recognized publication-ethics principles.

6. Consequences of Policy Violations

Depending on the nature, severity, and circumstances of a violation, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

  • Request correction or clarification;

  • Require manuscript revision;

  • Reject the manuscript;

  • Withdraw a manuscript from consideration;

  • Retract a published article;

  • Publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction notice;

  • Restrict future submissions for a specified period;

  • Notify the relevant institution or research authority where appropriate; or

  • Take other measures consistent with applicable publication-ethics standards.

The journal reserves the right to determine the appropriate response based on the evidence and seriousness of the alleged violation.

7. Post-Publication Concerns

The journal welcomes credible reports concerning plagiarism, undisclosed AI use, fabricated information, or other forms of research and publication misconduct in published articles.

All substantive allegations will be assessed objectively and, where necessary, investigated in accordance with established editorial procedures. Corrective action will be taken when evidence demonstrates that the integrity or reliability of the published record has been compromised.

8. Alignment with International Publication Ethics

The Liberal Journal of Language and Literature Review seeks to align this policy with internationally recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing, including relevant guidance and best practices issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and other appropriate scholarly and publishing organizations.

The journal may update this policy periodically to reflect developments in scholarly publishing, research-integrity standards, and responsible use of AI technologies.

9. Editorial Commitment

The Liberal Journal of Language and Literature Review is committed to protecting the integrity of the scholarly record. Plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, undisclosed substantial AI-generated content, and other forms of academic misconduct are treated seriously.

The journal promotes a publication environment based on originality, transparency, accountability, responsible AI use, rigorous peer review, and respect for intellectual property. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to uphold these principles throughout the publication process.