Publication Ethics

1. Editorial Responsibility

DeafJournal is committed to maintaining high standards of academic integrity, transparency, and ethical responsibility.

The editorial team ensures that all submissions are evaluated fairly, rigorously, and without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, academic status, gender, disability, language background, or hearing status.

Editorial decisions are based solely on the scholarly quality, relevance, and alignment of submissions with the journal’s scope and conceptual framework.

The editorial team also ensures confidentiality throughout the review process.

2. Peer Review and Editorial Review

DeafJournal applies an editorial review process informed by scholarly peer-review principles.

All submissions undergo an initial editorial screening. Suitable submissions are then reviewed by at least one or two reviewers, depending on the format and scope of the contribution.

The review process may involve revisions in dialogue with the author(s), reflecting the journal’s collaborative and participatory approach.

Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and, where appropriate, their familiarity with Deaf perspectives and sign language contexts.

Final decisions are made by the Editors-in-Chief.

3. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

• evaluate submissions fairly, objectively, and constructively

• maintain confidentiality regarding all submitted materials

• disclose any conflicts of interest

• respect the linguistic, cultural, and modal diversity of submissions, including sign language–based contributions

4. Author Responsibilities

Authors submitting to DeafJournal are expected to:

• submit original work that has not been published elsewhere

• appropriately acknowledge all sources and contributions

• ensure that their research complies with applicable ethical standards

• disclose any potential conflicts of interest

• obtain appropriate consent for research involving human participants

• respect the rights, dignity, and agency of Deaf individuals and communities involved in their research

Research involving Deaf participants should demonstrate sensitivity to linguistic, cultural, and participatory dimensions and should avoid reductive or deficit-oriented representations.

Where applicable, research involving human participants should comply with relevant ethical approval procedures and informed consent standards.

5. Plagiarism and Academic Misconduct

Plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, and other forms of academic misconduct are not tolerated.

If misconduct is suspected or identified, the editorial team reserves the right to:

• reject submissions

• retract published articles

• issue corrections or statements of concern

Such actions are taken in accordance with principles of fairness, transparency, and proportionality.

6. Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors are required to disclose any relationships or interests that could be perceived as influencing their work or judgment.

Where conflicts of interest exist, appropriate measures are taken to ensure an unbiased evaluation process.

7. Ethical Research Practice

DeafJournal supports research that is:

• community-based

• participatory where possible

• respectful of Deaf epistemologies

• transparent in its positionality and methodological choices

Research should demonstrate ethical awareness and avoid reductive or deficit-oriented representations of Deaf individuals and communities.

8. Corrections and Retractions

If significant errors or ethical concerns are identified after publication, DeafJournal will take appropriate action, which may include:

• publishing corrections

• issuing retractions

• providing editorial statements

Corrections and retractions will be clearly identified and linked to the original publication.

The aim of such actions is to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

9. Contact

Questions or concerns regarding publication ethics may be directed to:

contact@deafjournal.org