Publication Ethics

Training, Language and Culture is committed to encouraging responsible publication practices honouring the generally accepted ethical principles. The Editorial Board of Training, Language and Culture adheres to the policies promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Journal publisher, RUDN University, is a co-founder and member of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP) and supports the ASEP Declaration on Ethical Principles for Scientific Publications. Compliance with publication ethics ensures the integrity of scientific publishing and confidence in published articles. Therefore, Training, Language and Culture expects all authors to adhere to ethical requirements in the preparation of their manuscript.

Editors of Training, Language and Culture have responsibilities towards the authors contributing content to the journal, the peer reviewers who comment on the suitability of manuscripts for publication, the journal’s readers and the scientific community in general. Editors have the responsibility to:

• provide clear statements disclosing the journal’s aims, scope, publication ethics and peer review policies, and follow the corresponding regulations;
• provide guidelines outlining the processes of preparation and submission of manuscripts;
• treat all contributors with fairness, courtesy, objectivity, honesty, and transparency;
• respect the intellectual independence of authors;
• protect the confidentiality of every submitted manuscript and personal data;
• make known any conflicts of interest that might arise;
• establish and follow an efficient and rapid peer review procedure;
• make editorial decisions with reasonable speed and communicate them to the authors in a clear and constructive manner;
• describe, implement, and regularly review policies for handling ethical issues and allegations or findings of misconduct by authors and anyone involved in the peer review process, specifically as provided for in COPE guidelines;
• ensure timely publication of accepted manuscripts;
• maintain the journal’s internal integrity, which includes correcting errors, differentiating types of content, identifying published material with proper references, providing contributor information, specifying preferred citation formats, identifying license types for published content, etc.

Authors contributing manuscripts to Training, Language and Culture have responsibilities towards journal editors, potential readers and the scientific community in general. Authors have the responsibility to:

• submit original work only;
• submit the manuscript to one journal at a time and confirm that the manuscript is not currently considered for publication elsewhere;
• follow the journal’s manuscript preparation requirements outlined in TLC Submission Guidelines;
• provide reliable results of the research and an objective discussion of its significance;
• include in the manuscript all the key data, as well as an accurate description of the details of the study and links to ensure the reproducibility of the results;
• acknowledge and confirm that falsification of data or knowingly incorrect statements in the manuscript are considered unethical and unacceptable;
• observe accuracy in citing and indicating sources;
• mention in the manuscript all publications that have significantly influenced the preparation of the research or defined its format;
• ensure that the list of authors includes people who have made a significant contribution to the research;
• ensure that all persons indicated as authors have approved the final version of the manuscript, as well as its submission to the journal for publication;
• disclose all and any possible conflicts of interest related to the publication of the manuscript;
• actively participate in the review process, respond promptly to questions and, if necessary, correct the manuscript in accordance with the requirements of the reviewer.

Training, Language and Culture is committed to ensuring a fair and productive peer review process to secure the integrity of the scholarly record, and adheres to the policies promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Reviewers working with the manuscripts submitted to Training, Language and Culture have the responsibility to follow the regulations outlined in the journal’s Peer Review policy.

Plagiarism refers to (1) an act or instance of using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorisation and the representation of that author’s work as one’s own, as by not crediting the original author, or (2) a piece of writing or other work reflecting such unauthorised use or imitation. Training, Language and Culture considers plagiarism a serious offense and is committed to eliminating manuscripts with possible cases of plagiarism from its review and publication process. The journal uses RUDN University in-house duplicate check software to screen each manuscript for possible cases of plagiarism. Plagiarism check is the first step in the manuscript review process. Manuscripts that are found to contain unacceptable level of similarity with other published works shall be immediately rejected. Submitted manuscripts should be the original works of the author(s). Training, Language and Culture will follow COPE guidelines for suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript.

Duplicate submission is a situation whereby an author submits the same or similar manuscripts to two different journals simultaneously. This includes the submission of manuscripts derived from the same data in such a manner that there are no substantial differences in the manuscripts. Duplicate submission also includes the submission of the same/similar manuscript in different languages to different journals. Duplicate submissions will be considered unacceptable, and each author is required to state in writing that their manuscript has not been published before and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In handling cases of duplicate submissions Training, Language and Culture will follow COPE text recycling guidelines for editors.

Any kind of fabrication, manipulation and/or falsification of data is considered unethical, and Training, Language and Culture is committed to verifying the data presented in the submitted manuscripts through rigorous assessment of methodological procedures applied in the research, as well as through online check for comparable data. The journal will act in compliance with COPE guidelines for data and reproducibility in dealing with suspected cases of data fabrication, manipulation and/or falsification.

A manuscript should contain only relevant citations. Inclusion of citations that are not relevant to the work is strongly discouraged. Similarly, irrelevant self-citation to increase one’s citation rating is considered unethical.

To maintain the objectivity, scholarly integrity, and balance of academic discourse, authors are advised to limit the number of self-citations in submitted manuscripts. Specifically, a maximum of four (4) self-citations is permitted per submission. Self-citations refer to instances where the author references their own previously published work, whether as a sole author or co-author. While self-citation may be appropriate to build on prior research, excessive or unnecessary self-citation may raise concerns about bias, self-promotion, and distortion of the scholarly record. This policy aligns with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) recommendations and widely accepted best practices in academic publishing, which emphasise transparency, ethical authorship, and the avoidance of citation manipulation. We encourage authors to cite literature based on its relevance and merit, not authorship. Key points:

• A maximum of four (4) self-citations is allowed per manuscript.
• All references must be relevant, contribute to the scholarly context, and be justified within the research framework.
• Editors and reviewers will assess whether citations (including self-citations) are appropriate and proportionate.

Authors are reminded that violation of this guideline may lead to a request for revision or rejection of the manuscript.

Individuals who participated in the development of a manuscript but do not qualify as an author should be acknowledged. Organisations that provided support in terms of funding and/or other resources should also be acknowledged.

Conflict of interest exists when there is a divergence between an individual’s private interests (competing interests) and his or her responsibilities to scientific and publishing activities such that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual’s behaviour or judgment was motivated by considerations of his or her competing interests. Authors are expected to disclose all financial/relevant interest that may have influenced the development of the manuscript. Reviewers should disclose any conflict of interest and if necessary, decline the review of any manuscript they perceive to have a conflict of interest. Editors of Training, Language and Culture will also decline from considering any manuscript that may have conflict of interest. Such manuscripts will be re-assigned to other editors.

A submitted manuscript is a confidential material. Training, Language and Culture will not disclose submitted manuscript to anyone except individuals who partake in the processing and preparation of the manuscript for publication (if accepted). These individuals include editorial staff, corresponding authors, potential reviewers, actual reviewers, and editors. However, in suspected cases of misconduct, a manuscript may be revealed to third parties that may require it for the resolution of the misconduct.

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. Corrections may be made to a published article with the authorisation of the editor of the journal. Editors will decide the magnitude of the corrections. Minor corrections are made directly to the original article. However, in cases of major corrections, the original article will remain unchanged, while the corrected version will also be published. Both the original and corrected version will be linked to each other. A statement indicating the reason for the major change to the article will also be published. When necessary, retraction of articles will be done according to COPE retraction guidelines.

As AI-assisted technologies become increasingly prevalent in scientific writing, Training, Language and Culture has established guidelines to regulate their use. The journal will continue to monitor developments in this field and adjust its policy as necessary.

Policy for Authors. Authors may utilise AI-assisted tools strictly for improving the linguistic quality and readability of their manuscripts. However, AI-generated content must be used under human supervision, with authors thoroughly reviewing and refining the output. It is important to acknowledge that AI-generated text, despite appearing credible, may contain inaccuracies, incomplete information, or inherent biases.

Authors must ensure the accuracy and legitimacy of all references cited in their manuscripts. AI-generated citations, including references that do not correspond to actual published works or misattribute sources, are strictly prohibited. Authors are responsible for verifying each citation against reputable databases and ensuring that AI tools have not introduced fabricated or incorrect references. Additionally, if AI is used to assist in literature reviews, authors must critically engage with the original sources rather than relying solely on AI-generated summaries, as these may misrepresent key arguments or omit crucial contextual details.

If AI-assisted translation tools are used in manuscript preparation, authors must carefully review and verify the accuracy of the translated text. AI-generated translations may introduce errors in terminology, distort meaning, or fail to convey the intended nuances of the original language. Authors bear full responsibility for ensuring that all translated content, including direct quotations and references to foreign-language sources, accurately reflects the original material. Misleading or inaccurate translations resulting from AI misuse will be considered a breach of research integrity.

Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of their work. Any use of AI tools must be disclosed in the manuscript, and this information will be included in the published article to maintain transparency and uphold trust within the academic community.

AI tools cannot be credited as authors or co-authors. Authorship entails responsibilities and contributions that only humans can fulfil. Authors must ensure that their submissions are original, adhere to ethical standards, and do not infringe on third-party rights.

The use of AI-assisted tools to create, alter, or process images in manuscripts is strictly prohibited. However, standard image enhancements such as brightness, contrast, and colour balance adjustments are allowed, provided they do not misrepresent the original data.

If AI tools are integral to the research methodology, their use must be fully documented in the Material and Methods section, including the AI tool’s name and specifications.

Policy for Reviewers. Manuscripts under review are confidential and must not be uploaded, in whole or in part, to AI tools, as this could compromise author confidentiality and intellectual property rights. This restriction also applies to peer review comments, which may contain sensitive information about the manuscript and its authors.

The use of AI tools in peer review is not permitted, as scientific evaluation requires critical thinking and independent judgment – capabilities beyond AI’s scope. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the content of their assessments.

Policy for Editors. All submitted manuscripts are confidential and must not be uploaded to AI tools under any circumstances, as this could violate author rights and compromise confidentiality. Similarly, AI tools must not be used to assist in editorial decision-making.

The editorial process demands human expertise, critical analysis, and objective assessment – tasks that cannot be delegated to AI. Editors are fully responsible for manuscript evaluation, decision-making, and communication with authors.

The journal permits the use of secure AI technologies for administrative purposes, such as manuscript completeness checks, plagiarism detection, and reviewer selection, provided that confidentiality is strictly maintained.

All submissions undergo a similarity check and an AI-generated content assessment using RUDN University’s text verification software. The interpretation of AI-generation detection results is at the full discretion of the editorial office. If a manuscript is flagged for AI-generated content, editors will evaluate the extent and nature of AI involvement. If the editorial office determines that AI-generated content has been used beyond permitted linguistic assistance – such as in developing ideas, structuring arguments, or composing substantial portions of text – the manuscript may be rejected on these grounds.

Any manuscript rejected due to AI-generated content concerns cannot be resubmitted to the journal.

Authors contributing manuscripts to Training, Language and Culture are required to include in the text of the manuscript a statement affirming that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed and rigorously protected. Research involving human subjects must comply with all relevant ethical guidelines, regulatory standards, and institutional review board (IRB) requirements. Any potential risks to participants should be clearly disclosed in the manuscript, along with the measures taken to minimise harm and ensure their well-being.

When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Declaration of Helsinki, as revised in 2013. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.