Data and Reproducibility

Data and Reproducibility

1. Introduction

Magistra Andalusia: Jurnal Ilmu Sastra (MAJIS) is committed to promoting transparency, methodological clarity, research integrity, and reproducibility in scholarly publishing.

The journal recognises that transparent access to the materials underlying scholarly claims enables readers, reviewers, and other researchers to better understand, assess, verify, and build upon published research. Although the nature of research data differs substantially across disciplines, the principles of transparency and responsible data management apply to literary studies as well as to other fields of scholarship.

In literary studies and related humanities disciplines, research materials may include literary texts, manuscripts, archival documents, interview transcripts, field notes, recordings, photographs, digitised materials, textual corpora, coding schemes, analytical frameworks, bibliographic databases, computational scripts, annotation files, datasets, and other materials used to support the research.

MAJIS therefore encourages authors to make the underlying materials of their research available whenever ethically, legally, and practically possible. The journal also recognises that some research materials cannot be made publicly available because of copyright restrictions, privacy requirements, cultural sensitivity, contractual limitations, archival conditions, or other legitimate restrictions.

This policy establishes MAJIS's expectations regarding:

• research data availability;

• Data Availability Statements;

• data and material sharing;

• data citation;

• documentation and metadata;

• methodological transparency;

• reproducibility and reusability;

• reporting standards;

• research registration where applicable;

• data integrity and retention; and

• post-publication concerns relating to research data.

MAJIS's current Publication Ethics policy requires a Data Availability Statement (DAS) in every published article and encourages the use of trusted repositories appropriate to humanities research, including OSF, Zenodo, and institutional repositories. Authors are expected to provide underlying research materials upon reasonable request unless access is restricted by law, contract, or ethical considerations.

This policy is aligned with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practice on Data and Reproducibility, which states that journals should have policies on data availability and encourage appropriate reporting standards and study registration according to disciplinary practice.

This policy does not imply COPE approval, certification, or endorsement of MAJIS.

---

2. Description

2.1 Research Data

For the purposes of this policy, research data refers to the materials, records, observations, documents, files, or other evidence collected, generated, selected, processed, or analysed in support of a research article.

In the context of MAJIS, research data may include:

• literary texts and textual corpora;

• manuscripts and archival materials;

• historical documents;

• interview transcripts;

• field notes;

• observation records;

• questionnaires;

• survey responses;

• recordings;

• photographs;

• audiovisual materials;

• digitised documents;

• annotations;

• coding schemes;

• qualitative datasets;

• bibliographic databases;

• textual databases;

• metadata;

• computational datasets;

• scripts and software;

• digital humanities tools;

• analytical models;

• tables and structured research records; and

• supplementary materials supporting the published findings.

Research data does not necessarily mean numerical datasets. In humanities research, the relevant evidence may be textual, visual, oral, archival, cultural, digital, or interpretive.

2.2 Primary and Secondary Materials

MAJIS distinguishes between:

Primary Research Materials

Materials directly examined, collected, created, or analysed by the researchers, such as:

• manuscripts;

• interview transcripts;

• recordings;

• field observations;

• archival documents;

• survey responses;

• textual corpora; and

• original datasets.

Secondary Research Materials

Materials created or published by other researchers, institutions, archives, libraries, databases, or organisations and subsequently used in the research.

Authors must properly identify and cite both primary and secondary sources.

Where secondary materials are subject to access restrictions, authors should provide sufficient bibliographic and methodological information to enable readers to identify and, where possible, access the original source.

2.3 Research Materials

Research materials encompass materials necessary to understand, verify, reproduce, or appropriately reuse the research process.

Depending on the study, these may include:

• coding frameworks;

• annotation guidelines;

• analytical protocols;

• interview guides;

• questionnaires;

• transcription conventions;

• data dictionaries;

• metadata;

• scripts;

• software;

• computational notebooks;

• spreadsheets;

• statistical files;

• digital corpus configurations;

• image-processing workflows; and

• supplementary files.

2.4 Reproducibility

Reproducibility refers to the extent to which the results or analytical conclusions of a study can be independently obtained or checked using the information, data, materials, and procedures provided by the authors.

In humanities research, reproducibility may take different forms.

Computational Reproducibility

Computational results can be regenerated using the same data, code, software, and documented analytical procedures.

Procedural Reproducibility

Other researchers can understand and repeat the principal research procedures using the methodological information provided.

Analytical Transparency

Readers can understand how the researchers moved from source materials or observations to interpretation, findings, and conclusions.

Interpretive Reproducibility

In interpretive literary research, exact replication of an interpretation may not always be possible or desirable. The relevant standard is therefore transparency regarding the textual evidence, analytical framework, methodological choices, and reasoning supporting the interpretation.

MAJIS does not require researchers to produce identical interpretations where the research is inherently interpretive.

2.5 Data Availability

Data availability refers to the extent to which research data and supporting materials can be accessed by readers or qualified researchers.

Data may be:

• openly available;

• available as supplementary material;

• available through a trusted repository;

• available upon reasonable request;

• available through controlled access; or

• unavailable because of legitimate legal, ethical, contractual, copyright, privacy, or cultural restrictions.

2.6 Data Availability Statement

A Data Availability Statement (DAS) is a declaration explaining whether and how the materials underlying the research can be accessed.

A DAS is mandatory for all MAJIS articles.

Where a study does not generate or analyse research data, the DAS should explicitly state that fact.

---

3. Policy

3.1 General Principle of Data Transparency

MAJIS encourages authors to make the materials supporting their published research available whenever ethically, legally, and practically possible.

Authors should provide sufficient information for readers and researchers to understand:

• what materials were used;

• where the materials originated;

• how they were collected or selected;

• how they were processed;

• how they were analysed;

• how they support the findings; and

• where the materials can be accessed.

3.2 Mandatory Data Availability Statement

Every article published by MAJIS must contain a Data Availability Statement.

The statement should accurately describe the availability of the research data and supporting materials.

The statement should not claim that data are available if the authors do not actually have the right or ability to provide access.

3.3 Open Data Where Appropriate

Authors are strongly encouraged to deposit research data and supporting materials in a trusted repository when:

• the materials can legally be shared;

• sharing does not create unacceptable ethical risks;

• copyright permits redistribution;

• privacy can be adequately protected; and

• the materials are sufficiently documented for meaningful reuse.

Suitable repositories may include:

• OSF;

• Zenodo;

• institutional repositories;

• discipline-specific repositories;

• recognised archival repositories; and

• other trusted repositories appropriate to the research material.

MAJIS's current policy specifically identifies OSF, Zenodo, and institutional repositories as examples of appropriate repositories for humanities research.

3.4 Data That Cannot Be Shared Publicly

MAJIS recognises that not all research materials can be openly shared.

Legitimate restrictions may arise from:

• copyright;

• licensing conditions;

• archival restrictions;

• contractual obligations;

• privacy;

• confidentiality;

• research-participant protection;

• cultural or community restrictions;

• national or institutional regulations;

• commercial agreements;

• third-party ownership;

• security concerns; or

• other legal or ethical requirements.

Authors should explain the relevant restriction in the Data Availability Statement.

Where possible, authors should provide an alternative access mechanism.

3.5 Copyright-Protected Literary and Archival Materials

MAJIS recognises that literary research frequently relies on copyrighted works, manuscripts, archival collections, photographs, recordings, and other third-party materials.

Authors must not upload or redistribute copyrighted materials to a public repository unless they have the legal right to do so.

Where the underlying source cannot legally be shared, authors should instead provide:

• complete bibliographic information;

• archival identification;

• collection name;

• catalogue number, where applicable;

• stable URL or persistent identifier, where available;

• description of the relevant material; and

• information explaining how qualified researchers may obtain access.

For literary works, authors should not assume that publication in an open-access article automatically grants permission to redistribute the full underlying copyrighted text.

3.6 Human Participant Data

Where research involves interviews, surveys, oral histories, fieldwork, or other human participants, authors must consider privacy and confidentiality before sharing data.

Personally identifiable information should not be publicly released unless:

• appropriate consent has been obtained;

• disclosure is ethically justified; and

• applicable legal requirements permit disclosure.

Where appropriate, authors should:

• remove direct identifiers;

• pseudonymise or anonymise data;

• remove indirect identifiers where necessary;

• restrict access to sensitive materials; and

• explain the access conditions in the DAS.

3.7 Sensitive Cultural and Community Materials

MAJIS recognises that some literary, oral, indigenous, community-based, or culturally sensitive materials may require restrictions on access.

Open publication should not override legitimate community, cultural, ethical, or legal restrictions.

Where materials cannot be openly shared, authors should describe:

• the nature of the restriction;

• the authority or community responsible for access, where appropriate;

• whether controlled access is possible; and

• how qualified researchers may request access.

3.8 Data Citation

Authors must appropriately cite datasets, archival collections, digital corpora, databases, software, and other research materials used in their research.

Where a persistent identifier exists, authors should use it.

Preferred identifiers include:

• DOI;

• Handle;

• accession number;

• stable archival identifier; or

• another persistent identifier appropriate to the material.

Data and research-material citations should be included in the manuscript and, where appropriate, in the reference list.

3.9 Attribution of Data and Materials

Authors must acknowledge the creators, custodians, institutions, archives, libraries, communities, or organisations responsible for research materials.

Appropriate attribution is particularly important for:

• archival collections;

• oral histories;

• digitised cultural materials;

• community-generated materials;

• datasets created by other researchers;

• digital corpora; and

• software.

Data sharing must not be treated as permission to remove attribution requirements.

3.10 Documentation and Metadata

Shared research materials should be accompanied by sufficient documentation to enable readers to understand them.

Depending on the type of research, documentation may include:

• README files;

• data dictionaries;

• coding manuals;

• annotation guidelines;

• transcription conventions;

• metadata;

• variable descriptions;

• file descriptions;

• methodological notes;

• software versions;

• analytical procedures; and

• information about data provenance.

3.11 Reproducibility of Literary Interpretation

MAJIS recognises that literary scholarship often involves interpretation rather than experiments that can be mechanically replicated.

Therefore, authors are expected to make the basis of interpretation transparent, rather than to guarantee identical conclusions.

Authors should clearly identify:

• the primary texts or materials analysed;

• the edition or version used;

• relevant textual passages;

• analytical or theoretical frameworks;

• methodological procedures;

• selection criteria;

• coding or categorisation procedures, where applicable; and

• the reasoning connecting evidence to conclusions.

3.12 Reproducibility of Qualitative Research

For qualitative studies, authors should provide sufficient methodological detail concerning:

• research design;

• participant or material selection;

• data collection;

• transcription;

• coding;

• thematic analysis;

• interpretive procedures;

• researcher positionality where relevant; and

• analytical limitations.

Where qualitative data cannot be shared because of confidentiality or ethical restrictions, authors should explain this limitation.

3.13 Reproducibility of Digital Humanities Research

For research involving digital humanities methods, authors should provide, where applicable:

• corpus description;

• corpus construction criteria;

• source information;

• digitisation procedures;

• annotation schemes;

• software names and versions;

• scripts;

• algorithms;

• computational workflows;

• parameters;

• preprocessing procedures;

• analytical settings; and

• repository information.

Where code is created specifically for the study, authors are strongly encouraged to deposit it in a trusted repository.

3.14 Software and Code

When software, scripts, or computational tools materially contribute to the research, authors should identify:

• software name;

• version;

• relevant packages or dependencies;

• operating environment where material;

• analytical procedure; and

• access location.

Where authors have created original code, the code should be shared when legally and ethically possible.

3.15 Research Protocols and Analytical Frameworks

Authors should provide or describe research protocols and analytical frameworks sufficiently to enable readers to understand how the research was conducted.

Examples include:

• interview protocols;

• coding frameworks;

• textual-analysis procedures;

• corpus-selection criteria;

• annotation schemes;

• search strategies;

• systematic-review protocols; and

• computational workflows.

3.16 Reporting Guidelines

MAJIS encourages authors to follow recognised reporting guidelines appropriate to their research design and discipline.

The relevant standard should be selected according to the nature of the study rather than applied mechanically to every article.

Where established guidelines exist for a particular methodology, authors should follow them where appropriate.

COPE identifies reporting guidelines and study registration as part of its Data and Reproducibility Core Practice.

3.17 Registration of Studies

Where registration is an established or appropriate practice for a particular research design, authors are encouraged to register the study in a recognised public registry.

This may be relevant to:

• systematic reviews;

• certain empirical studies;

• research protocols;

• structured evidence syntheses; or

• other study designs where registration is an accepted disciplinary practice.

Registration is not required for ordinary literary interpretation merely because the study does not involve a registrable research design.

Where a study has been registered, authors should provide the registration identifier.

3.18 Data Integrity

Authors are responsible for ensuring that research data and materials have not been:

• fabricated;

• falsified;

• selectively manipulated in a misleading manner;

• materially altered without disclosure;

• misrepresented; or

• presented in a manner that creates a false impression of the underlying evidence.

Normal scholarly processing, such as transcription, anonymisation, formatting, coding, or legitimate image enhancement, should be documented where it materially affects interpretation.

3.19 Image and Audio-Visual Materials

Where images, photographs, scans, audio recordings, or videos form part of the evidence, authors should preserve the integrity of the materials.

Any substantial manipulation should be disclosed.

Where original materials are available and legally shareable, authors are encouraged to preserve and provide access to them through an appropriate repository.

For images that have undergone legitimate processing, authors should describe the relevant procedures when they materially affect interpretation.

3.20 Data Retention

Authors are expected to retain underlying research materials for a reasonable period after publication, subject to:

• institutional requirements;

• funder requirements;

• legal obligations;

• ethical requirements;

• archival restrictions; and

• the nature of the research.

Where an institution or funder specifies a retention period, authors should follow that requirement.

3.21 Access Upon Reasonable Request

Authors should provide underlying research materials to MAJIS or qualified researchers upon reasonable request where:

• the authors possess the materials;

• disclosure is legally permitted;

• ethical restrictions do not prohibit disclosure; and

• the request is relevant to verification or scholarly reuse.

The journal may request access to underlying materials when legitimate concerns arise regarding research integrity or the reliability of published findings. MAJIS's existing Publication Ethics policy explicitly allows editors to request underlying materials such as original images and other research materials when integrity concerns arise.

3.22 Restrictions on Data Access

When data cannot be provided upon request, authors should explain the reason.

Acceptable reasons may include:

• legal restrictions;

• copyright;

• privacy;

• confidentiality;

• contractual restrictions;

• institutional restrictions;

• cultural restrictions;

• third-party ownership; or

• other legitimate ethical or regulatory requirements.

A general statement such as "data are unavailable" without explanation may be insufficient where the research generated or analysed potentially shareable materials.

3.23 Embargoes

Authors may use an embargo where there is a legitimate reason for delaying public access to research materials.

The DAS should state:

• the existence of the embargo;

• its duration;

• the reason for the embargo; and

• the expected access date.

An embargo should not be used merely to prevent legitimate verification or scholarly scrutiny.

3.24 Post-Publication Data Concerns

If concerns arise after publication regarding:

• data integrity;

• data availability;

• data provenance;

• data manipulation;

• methodological reproducibility; or

• interpretation of underlying evidence,

MAJIS will assess the concern according to its publication-ethics procedures and relevant COPE guidance.

Depending on the findings, possible actions include:

• requesting clarification;

• requesting underlying materials;

• publishing a correction;

• publishing an editorial note;

• issuing an Expression of Concern; or

• retracting the article where the findings are demonstrated to be unreliable.

3.25 Data Availability Does Not Override Ethical Obligations

The journal does not require authors to make data available when doing so would create unacceptable risks to:

• research participants;

• confidential sources;

• vulnerable individuals;

• communities;

• cultural heritage;

• copyright holders;

• research collaborators; or

• other legitimate interests.

Responsible data sharing requires balancing transparency with legal and ethical responsibilities.

---

4. Technicalities to Achieve and Materialise the Policies

4.1 Data Availability Statement

A Data Availability Statement is mandatory for every MAJIS article.

The statement should appear in the manuscript in the declarations section, preferably after the Conclusion and before the References.

The statement should correspond accurately to the actual status of the research materials.

Example 1 — Openly Available Data

Data Availability: The data supporting the findings of this study are openly available in [Repository Name] at [DOI/Persistent Identifier].

Example 2 — Supplementary Materials

Data Availability: The materials supporting the findings of this study are available as supplementary materials accompanying this article.

Example 3 — Available Upon Reasonable Request

Data Availability: The materials supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request, subject to applicable ethical and confidentiality restrictions.

Example 4 — Restricted Data

Data Availability: The materials supporting this study cannot be made publicly available because they contain confidential information and are subject to [ethical/legal/contractual] restrictions. Qualified researchers may request access from [institution/contact point], subject to the applicable access requirements.

Example 5 — Copyright-Protected Literary Materials

Data Availability: The primary literary materials analysed in this study are copyrighted works and cannot be redistributed by the authors. Full bibliographic information and details of the editions analysed are provided in the manuscript and References. Researchers may access the works through the relevant copyright holder, library, archive, or authorised repository.

Example 6 — Archival Materials

Data Availability: The archival materials analysed in this study are held by [Archive/Institution], collection [name], catalogue/reference number [identifier]. Access is subject to the policies and permissions of the archive.

Example 7 — No New Data

Data Availability: Data availability is not applicable to this article because no new research data were created or analysed.

This wording may be appropriate for certain conceptual, theoretical, or purely bibliographic articles.

---

4.2 Repository Selection

MAJIS recommends that authors use trusted repositories capable of providing:

• persistent access;

• stable identifiers;

• metadata;

• long-term preservation;

• appropriate access controls; and

• clear licensing information.

Examples include:

• OSF;

• Zenodo;

• institutional repositories;

• recognised disciplinary repositories;

• archival repositories; and

• other established repositories appropriate to the material.

The repository selected should match the nature and sensitivity of the data.

4.3 Repository Metadata

Authors should provide, where available:

• title;

• creator(s);

• description;

• date;

• version;

• keywords;

• methodology or context;

• licensing information;

• access conditions;

• DOI or persistent identifier; and

• relationship to the published article.

4.4 File Organisation

Shared materials should be organised in a clear structure.

For example:

research-materials/
├── README
├── metadata/
├── source-materials/
├── transcripts/
├── coding/
├── analysis/
├── scripts/
└── supplementary/

The actual structure should be adapted to the nature of the research.

4.5 README Documentation

Where multiple research files are deposited, authors should provide a README explaining:

• the purpose of the dataset;

• the relationship between files;

• file formats;

• abbreviations;

• coding conventions;

• relevant software;

• processing procedures;

• limitations; and

• access restrictions.

4.6 Data and Material Citation

A citation for deposited research materials should include, where available:

• creator(s);

• year;

• title;

• version;

• repository;

• persistent identifier.

Example:

Author, A. A. (2026). Research corpus and coding materials for [Article Title] (Version 1.0). Zenodo. https://doi.org/[DOI]

The exact citation format should follow the journal's applicable reference style.

4.7 Peer Review of Shared Materials

Where appropriate and feasible, reviewers may be invited to assess shared research materials.

Reviewers may consider:

• whether the data or materials correspond to the manuscript;

• whether the methodology is sufficiently documented;

• whether analytical procedures are adequately described;

• whether shared materials support the reported findings; and

• whether the DAS accurately describes access.

Reviewers are not expected to conduct a full independent replication of every study.

4.8 Data Access During Double-Anonymous Review

MAJIS uses a double-anonymous peer-review process.

Where a repository is used during anonymous review, authors should take reasonable steps to avoid unnecessarily revealing their identity through:

• repository account names;

• file metadata;

• acknowledgements;

• institutional identifiers;

• author names in README files; or

• other identifying information.

Where complete anonymisation of a repository is not technically possible, the editorial team may determine an appropriate alternative method of providing access.

4.9 Verification Requests

If an editor has a legitimate concern about the integrity or reproducibility of a manuscript, the editor may request:

• original source files;

• original images;

• transcripts;

• coding records;

• analytical files;

• scripts;

• metadata;

• documentation;

• source versions; or

• other underlying materials.

Authors should respond within a reasonable period.

4.10 Failure to Provide Requested Materials

If authors cannot provide requested materials, they should provide a clear explanation.

If materials were lost, destroyed, inaccessible, or never retained, authors should state this accurately.

Where the inability to provide underlying materials creates a significant concern regarding the reliability of the research, MAJIS may initiate an appropriate publication-ethics assessment.

4.11 Changes to Deposited Materials

Authors should not silently replace research materials in a way that changes the evidentiary basis of a published article.

Material revisions should:

• be versioned;

• be documented;

• preserve the previous version where appropriate; and

• explain the reason for the change.

Where a change materially affects a published article, the authors should notify MAJIS.

---

5. Responsibilities

5.1 Authors

Authors are primarily responsible for:

• maintaining accurate research records;

• preserving relevant underlying materials;

• describing methods transparently;

• providing a complete Data Availability Statement;

• depositing shareable materials where appropriate;

• respecting copyright and privacy;

• obtaining necessary permissions;

• citing datasets and other research materials;

• documenting analytical procedures; and

• responding to reasonable requests for verification.

5.2 Corresponding Author

The corresponding author should coordinate:

• the Data Availability Statement;

• repository information;

• data-access conditions;

• communication concerning requests for materials; and

• any necessary post-publication updates.

5.3 Editors

Editors are responsible for:

• ensuring that the DAS requirement is communicated to authors;

• identifying obvious inconsistencies;

• requesting clarification when necessary;

• protecting confidential materials;

• ensuring that data concerns are handled fairly; and

• initiating appropriate action when credible concerns about data integrity arise.

5.4 Reviewers

Reviewers should:

• assess whether the manuscript provides sufficient methodological information;

• consider the adequacy of the DAS where relevant;

• identify apparent inconsistencies between claims and supporting materials;

• maintain confidentiality; and

• notify the editor of credible concerns about data integrity or reproducibility.

Reviewers should not attempt to obtain or redistribute confidential research materials outside the authorised review process.

5.5 Editorial Office

The editorial office should:

• ensure that the DAS is present;

• verify that repository links or identifiers are technically accessible where feasible;

• maintain appropriate records;

• support editors in handling data concerns; and

• preserve confidentiality.

---

6. Exceptions and Special Cases

6.1 Purely Conceptual Articles

Conceptual or theoretical articles that do not create or analyse new research data may state:

Data Availability: Data availability is not applicable to this article because no new research data were created or analysed.

Authors should nevertheless provide complete citations for all sources and materials on which their arguments depend.

6.2 Literature Reviews

Literature reviews should provide sufficient information to identify the sources examined.

For systematic or structured reviews, authors should provide, where appropriate:

• search strategy;

• databases searched;

• search dates;

• inclusion criteria;

• exclusion criteria;

• screening process; and

• analytical approach.

If a review uses a structured dataset or screening file, authors are encouraged to deposit it where appropriate.

6.3 Archival Research

For archival research, authors should provide enough information to allow readers to locate the source material.

This may include:

• archive name;

• collection;

• box/folder number where permitted;

• catalogue identifier;

• document identifier;

• date; and

• access conditions.

6.4 Oral Literature and Oral History

For research involving oral literature, oral history, interviews, or community-based materials, authors should balance reproducibility with:

• informed consent;

• privacy;

• cultural protocols;

• confidentiality;

• ownership;

• community rights; and

• applicable ethical requirements.

6.5 Digital Literary Research

For digital literature or computational literary studies, authors should provide sufficient information regarding:

• digital corpus;

• source selection;

• data preparation;

• annotation;

• software;

• algorithms;

• parameters;

• scripts;

• analytical workflow; and

• version information.

Where the original digital corpus cannot legally be redistributed, authors should provide metadata and instructions for obtaining the source material where possible.

---

7. Post-Publication Data and Reproducibility Concerns

MAJIS recognises that data and methodological problems may become apparent only after publication.

Concerns may be raised by:

• readers;

• authors;

• reviewers;

• editors;

• institutions;

• research participants;

• data custodians; or

• other legitimate parties.

The journal will assess credible concerns concerning:

• fabricated data;

• falsified data;

• manipulated images;

• unreliable source materials;

• inaccurate data descriptions;

• unavailable data where availability was materially misrepresented;

• serious methodological omissions;

• incorrect repository information; or

• other problems affecting the reliability or transparency of the research.

Depending on the circumstances, MAJIS may:

1. request clarification from the authors;

2. request underlying materials;

3. consult independent experts;

4. contact an institution or relevant data custodian;

5. publish a correction;

6. publish an editorial note;

7. issue an Expression of Concern; or

8. retract the article where the findings are demonstrated to be unreliable.

These procedures should be applied consistently with the journal's Allegations of Misconduct and Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections policies.

---

8. Relationship with Other MAJIS Policies

This policy should be read together with the journal's other publication-ethics policies, particularly:

• Allegations of Misconduct;

• Ethical Oversight;

• Conflicts of Interest;

• Authorship and Contributorship;

• Intellectual Property;

• Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections;

• Retraction and Expression of Concern;

• AI Usage Policy; and

• Repository and Archiving Policies.

Data availability does not override copyright, privacy, consent, confidentiality, intellectual property, or other ethical requirements.

---

9. COPE Resources

This policy is based principally on the COPE Core Practice on Data and Reproducibility.

COPE states that journals should have policies concerning data availability and should encourage appropriate reporting guidelines and registration of clinical trials and other study designs according to standard disciplinary practice.

Relevant COPE resources include:

• COPE Core Practice: Data and Reproducibility

• Data and Reproducibility — COPE Focus

• Data Sharing — COPE Topic

• Data Availability Statements

• Ethics Toolkit for a Successful Editorial Office

• Ethical Concerns in Data Publication — COPE Flowcharts

• Concerns About Risk in Published Data

• Scientific Rigour of Unpublished Data

• Legal and Regulatory Restrictions on Published Data

• Data Availability for Vulnerable Populations

• Reproducibility of Methodology

The COPE framework should be applied in conjunction with disciplinary standards relevant to literary and humanities research. COPE does not require every journal to adopt identical data-sharing practices; the nature of the discipline, legal framework, ethical considerations, and characteristics of the research materials must be taken into account.

Official COPE resources are available through the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

---

10. Final Statement

MAJIS recognises that research transparency in literary and humanities scholarship cannot be reduced to the public release of numerical datasets.

For some studies, reproducibility depends primarily on access to datasets and computational code. For others, it depends on transparent documentation of textual sources, archival materials, interviews, analytical procedures, interpretive frameworks, coding schemes, and methodological decisions.

Accordingly, MAJIS promotes a proportionate and discipline-sensitive approach to data availability and reproducibility.

Authors are required to provide a Data Availability Statement for every article and are strongly encouraged to make supporting materials accessible through trusted repositories whenever this is ethically, legally, and practically possible.

Where materials cannot be openly shared, authors must provide a transparent explanation of the relevant restrictions and, where possible, an appropriate route for qualified researchers to obtain access.

MAJIS considers responsible data management, transparent methodology, accurate citation of research materials, and appropriate preservation of underlying evidence to be integral components of research integrity.

This policy has been developed with reference to the COPE Core Practice on Data and Reproducibility and related COPE guidance. It does not constitute or imply COPE approval, certification, or endorsement.