Ethical Oversight

1. Introduction

Magistra Andalusia: Jurnal Ilmu Sastra (MAJIS) is committed to ensuring that research published in the journal is conducted and reported in accordance with recognised ethical standards and applicable institutional, national, and international requirements.

The journal recognises that ethical considerations may arise not only in biomedical or experimental research but also in literary, cultural, historical, educational, archival, qualitative, digital, and interdisciplinary humanities research.

Research published by MAJIS may involve, among other things:

human participants;
interviews and oral histories;
personal or sensitive information;
identifiable individuals;
vulnerable groups;
communities and cultural groups;
archival and confidential materials;
copyrighted or restricted materials;
photographs, audio recordings, and audiovisual materials;
digital sources and online communities; and
animals or animal-derived materials in studies where these are relevant.

MAJIS therefore requires authors to identify and appropriately address ethical considerations associated with their research before submission.

The journal expects authors to obtain ethical approval where required by their institution, funder, research setting, or applicable regulations. Where formal ethical approval is not required or not applicable, authors should provide an appropriate explanation where ethical oversight may reasonably be expected.

This policy establishes MAJIS's requirements concerning:

ethical approval and exemption;
research involving human participants;
informed consent;
consent to publication;
vulnerable populations;
confidentiality and privacy;
personal and sensitive data;
minors and deceased persons;
research involving animals;
archival and cultural materials;
online and digital research;
risk assessment and participant protection;
ethical concerns arising during or after publication; and
editorial handling of ethical-oversight concerns.

MAJIS follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices, including the Core Practice on Ethical Oversight. COPE identifies ethical oversight as encompassing, among other matters, consent to publication, research involving vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of animal and human research, confidential data, and related ethical practices.

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

2. Description

2.1 Definition of Ethical Oversight

Ethical oversight refers to the processes and safeguards used to ensure that research is conducted responsibly, that the rights and welfare of participants and other affected parties are protected, and that research materials are obtained, handled, analysed, and published in accordance with applicable ethical standards.

Ethical oversight may be provided through:

institutional research ethics committees;
institutional review boards;
research ethics boards;
relevant governmental or professional bodies;
institutional procedures for determining exemption; or
other recognised ethical-review mechanisms appropriate to the research.

2.2 Ethical Oversight in Humanities Research

MAJIS recognises that not all humanities research presents the same ethical risks.

For example, a study based solely on publicly available literary texts may not require formal human-subject ethics approval, whereas a study involving interviews with identifiable individuals may require ethical review and informed consent.

Authors must therefore assess the ethical implications of their specific research design rather than assuming that humanities research is automatically exempt from ethical requirements.

2.3 Human Participants

For this policy, human participants include individuals who:

provide information through interviews;
participate in surveys;
provide oral histories;
participate in focus groups;
are observed for research purposes;
provide personal narratives;
provide recordings, photographs, or other identifiable materials; or
otherwise contribute information or materials that are treated as research data.

2.4 Personal and Sensitive Information

Personal information may include:

names;
contact information;
institutional affiliation;
photographs;
voice recordings;
video recordings;
employment information;
educational information;
family information;
social or cultural identity;
online identifiers; or
other information that could reasonably identify an individual.

Sensitive information may include information that could create significant personal, social, professional, legal, cultural, or other risks if disclosed.

2.5 Vulnerable Populations

A vulnerable population is a group or category of participants whose ability to protect their interests or freely provide informed consent may be limited by circumstances such as:

age;
dependency;
institutional status;
cognitive or communicative limitations;
social or economic disadvantage;
displacement;
marginalisation;
power imbalance;
legal status; or
other circumstances that may increase the risk of harm or coercion.

Vulnerability must be assessed in context. Membership of a particular social group does not automatically mean that an individual lacks capacity to provide informed consent.

2.6 Consent

Informed consent is a voluntary agreement to participate in research after receiving sufficient information about:

the purpose of the research;
what participation involves;
foreseeable risks;
potential benefits;
use of the information or materials;
confidentiality;
publication;
data storage and sharing; and
the participant's right to withdraw where applicable.

2.7 Consent to Publication

Consent to participate in research and consent to publication are not necessarily the same.

Where publication could identify an individual or disclose sensitive personal information, MAJIS expects authors to obtain appropriate consent to publication, unless a legitimate ethical or legal basis permits publication without individual consent.

2.8 Ethical Exemption

An ethical exemption may apply where research does not involve human participants, identifiable private information, or other activities requiring formal ethics review under the relevant institutional or regulatory framework.

Where an exemption has been granted, authors should report:

the institution or authority;
the relevant ethics committee or office;
the date, where available; and
the exemption or determination reference, where available.

Where no formal determination was available, authors should provide a concise justification explaining why formal ethical approval was not applicable.

3. Policy

3.1 General Ethical Requirement

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their research complies with applicable ethical standards before submitting a manuscript to MAJIS.

Where ethical approval is required, the research should not be presented as ethically approved unless such approval was actually obtained.

MAJIS may request evidence of ethical approval, exemption, consent, or other relevant documentation when necessary.

3.2 Institutional Ethics Approval

Research involving human participants or other ethically sensitive research activities should obtain approval from the appropriate institutional ethics committee or equivalent body where required.

The manuscript should identify:

name of the approving institution;
name of the ethics committee or board;
approval or protocol number, where available; and
date of approval where relevant.

3.3 Humanities Research and Exemption

MAJIS recognises that certain humanities studies may not require formal ethics approval.

Examples may include research based exclusively on:

published literary works;
publicly accessible historical documents;
public-domain archival materials;
publicly available bibliographic information;
openly available literary criticism; or
other sources that do not involve human participants or private information.

However, authors should not assume that a study is exempt solely because it belongs to the humanities.

Where ethical review was not required, authors should provide a concise statement explaining the basis for the exemption or non-applicability.

3.4 Human Participant Research

Research involving human participants must be conducted in a manner that respects:

autonomy;
dignity;
privacy;
confidentiality;
informed consent;
minimisation of harm; and
the participant's right to make voluntary decisions.

The potential social, psychological, professional, cultural, or reputational consequences of participation should be considered.

3.5 Informed Consent

Authors must obtain informed consent before collecting information from human participants when consent is required by the applicable ethical framework.

Consent procedures should be appropriate to:

the participant's age;
language;
cultural context;
capacity;
research setting; and
nature of the research.

Participants should understand how their information will be used and whether it may appear in a published article.

3.6 Documentation of Consent

Authors should maintain appropriate documentation demonstrating that consent was obtained.

Consent documentation may include:

written consent forms;
electronic consent records;
audio-recorded consent where appropriate;
institutional consent documentation; or
another ethically appropriate form of documented consent.

Authors should retain evidence of consent according to applicable institutional and legal requirements.

Consent documentation should generally not be submitted with the manuscript unless requested by the editor.

3.7 Consent to Publication

Written consent to publication should be obtained where an individual may be identifiable from:

photographs;
videos;
audio recordings;
case descriptions;
personal narratives;
quotations;
detailed biographical information;
unique professional or institutional information; or
combinations of information that could reasonably permit identification.

The consent should explain that the material may be published and made publicly accessible.

3.8 Identifiable Individuals

Where identification is possible, authors should:

obtain appropriate consent to publication;
minimise unnecessary identifying information;
explain why identification is necessary;
protect information that is not necessary for the scholarly purpose; and
ensure that publication does not create avoidable harm.

Identification should be limited to what is necessary for the scholarly purpose.

3.9 Anonymisation and Pseudonymisation

Where identification is not necessary, authors should anonymise or pseudonymise participant information.

Anonymisation should consider not only direct identifiers but also combinations of information that could permit re-identification.

Pseudonymisation does not necessarily make information anonymous. Authors should therefore consider whether individuals could still reasonably be identified.

3.10 Minors

Research involving minors requires additional ethical safeguards.

Where required, authors should obtain:

appropriate parental or guardian consent; and
the minor's assent where developmentally appropriate.

The research should be designed to minimise risk and respect the child's welfare and dignity.

Where a minor may be identifiable in the published article, appropriate consent to publication should be obtained.

3.11 Deceased Persons

Where research involves identifiable deceased persons, authors should consider:

applicable law;
institutional requirements;
family or representative interests;
cultural considerations;
archival restrictions; and
potential reputational or other harm.

Where required or ethically appropriate, consent should be obtained from an authorised representative.

3.12 Proxy Consent

Proxy consent may be required where an individual cannot legally or ethically provide consent themselves.

Examples may include:

minors;
individuals lacking relevant decision-making capacity; or
deceased persons where an authorised representative is appropriate.

Proxy consent should be obtained from an appropriately authorised person or body.

3.13 Vulnerable Participants

Research involving vulnerable groups requires additional safeguards.

Authors should:

minimise risks;
avoid coercion;
ensure voluntary participation;
use accessible consent procedures;
protect confidentiality;
avoid unnecessary identification;
consider power relationships; and
justify the inclusion of vulnerable participants where relevant.

The vulnerability of participants should not be exploited for scholarly or institutional advantage.

3.14 Power Relationships

Authors should pay particular attention to research involving relationships in which participation may be influenced by dependency or authority.

Examples may include:

teachers and students;
supervisors and students;
employers and employees;
institutional authorities and subordinates;
researchers and dependent participants; or
researchers and communities with significant power asymmetries.

Participation should be voluntary and should not affect access to educational, professional, institutional, or other benefits.

3.15 Confidentiality

Authors must protect confidential information obtained during research.

Confidential information should not be disclosed in a publication unless:

appropriate consent has been obtained;
disclosure is legally required;
disclosure is necessary and ethically justified; or
the information is already legitimately public and its use does not create an unreasonable risk of harm.

3.16 Quotations from Participants

Direct quotations from participants may be published where ethically and legally appropriate.

Authors should consider whether quotations contain information that could identify or harm participants.

Where quotations are potentially identifiable, appropriate consent to publication should be obtained.

3.17 Interviews and Oral Histories

Research involving interviews and oral histories should clearly describe, where relevant:

participant recruitment;
consent procedures;
recording procedures;
transcription;
anonymisation;
storage;
data access; and
publication arrangements.

Where interviewees are identified by name, authors should ensure that the participant understands that their statements may be published.

3.18 Audio and Video Recordings

Audio or video recordings containing identifiable individuals should not be publicly distributed without appropriate consent and legal authority.

Where recordings are necessary as evidence, authors should consider:

whether a transcript can be provided instead;
whether identifying features can be removed;
whether access can be restricted; and
whether participant consent covers public dissemination.

3.19 Online and Digital Research

MAJIS recognises that publicly accessible online material may still involve ethical considerations.

The fact that information is technically accessible online does not automatically mean that it is ethically appropriate to reproduce:

personal information;
usernames;
photographs;
private communications;
sensitive statements;
identifiable quotations; or
other potentially harmful material.

Authors conducting research using online communities or platforms should consider:

user expectations of privacy;
platform terms;
consent;
vulnerability;
potential harm;
contextual integrity; and
applicable law.

3.20 Social Media Content

Public social-media posts may be used as research material where appropriate, but authors should consider whether reproducing the content could expose individuals to harm or unwanted identification.

Where the content is sensitive or the individual is vulnerable, authors should consider anonymisation or obtaining consent where appropriate.

3.21 Private Communications

Private communications, including:

emails;
private messages;
unpublished correspondence;
personal letters; and
private interviews,

should not be reproduced without appropriate permission or consent, unless a legitimate ethical and legal basis exists.

3.22 Archival Materials

Authors using archival materials must comply with:

archive access conditions;
copyright;
donor restrictions;
confidentiality requirements;
applicable privacy rules; and
other conditions imposed by the custodial institution.

Where an archive restricts reproduction, authors must not reproduce restricted materials merely for the purpose of improving transparency.

3.23 Cultural and Community Materials

MAJIS recognises that some cultural, oral, indigenous, or community-based materials may be subject to collective expectations or restrictions that are not adequately captured by individual consent alone.

Authors should respect:

community protocols;
cultural restrictions;
custodial rights;
intellectual property;
traditional knowledge considerations; and
agreements governing access and publication.

Where appropriate, researchers should consult relevant community representatives or custodians before publication.

3.24 Research Involving Animals

Although animal research is not expected to constitute a major category of research submitted to MAJIS, studies involving animals must comply with applicable ethical requirements.

Where animal research is included in a manuscript, authors should provide:

ethics approval or relevant institutional authorisation;
identification of the responsible committee or authority;
relevant approval number where available;
description of humane treatment;
measures taken to minimise pain or distress; and
justification for the use of animals where appropriate.

MAJIS will not accept research involving unnecessary or unjustified animal harm.

COPE explicitly includes ethical conduct of research involving animals within its Ethical Oversight Core Practice.

3.25 Animal-Derived Materials

Where research uses animal-derived materials rather than live animals, authors should comply with applicable ethical, legal, and institutional requirements concerning:

provenance;
collection;
handling;
ownership; and
relevant permissions.

3.26 Risk of Harm

Authors must consider foreseeable risks arising from publication.

Potential harms may include:

physical harm;
psychological harm;
social harm;
reputational harm;
professional consequences;
legal consequences;
cultural harm;
privacy violations; or
unwanted identification.

The scholarly value of publication should be balanced against reasonably foreseeable risks.

3.27 Research With Sensitive Topics

Research concerning sensitive subjects may include:

violence;
abuse;
discrimination;
sexuality;
trauma;
political persecution;
conflict;
marginalisation;
personal histories; or
other potentially harmful subjects.

Authors should take appropriate measures to protect participants and avoid unnecessary exposure or identification.

3.28 Ethical Use of Secondary Data

When using data collected by another researcher or institution, authors remain responsible for ensuring that their use of the material is ethically and legally appropriate.

Where relevant, authors should verify:

whether consent permits secondary use;
whether access restrictions apply;
whether data may be redistributed;
whether anonymisation is sufficient; and
whether the dataset has appropriate ethical provenance.

3.29 Third-Party Personal Data

Authors must not publish third-party personal data merely because they have obtained access to it.

The right to access information does not automatically constitute the right to publish it.

Where personal data are necessary to the research argument, authors should provide only the minimum information required.

3.30 Ethical Approval Obtained Retrospectively

Retrospective ethical approval should not be represented as though it had been obtained before the research was conducted.

If research was conducted without required ethical approval, the author should disclose the circumstances honestly.

MAJIS may consult the relevant institution or ethics body where necessary.

3.31 Research Without Required Approval

Where required ethical approval was not obtained, MAJIS may:

request an explanation;
request evidence of institutional determination;
seek additional ethical assessment;
reject the manuscript;
suspend publication;
issue a correction or editorial notice where appropriate; or
consider post-publication action if the article has already been published.

3.32 Ethical Concerns Identified After Publication

Ethical concerns may be raised after publication by:

participants;
readers;
authors;
institutions;
reviewers;
research ethics committees;
data custodians; or
other legitimate parties.

MAJIS will assess credible concerns concerning:

lack of consent;
inappropriate identification;
privacy violations;
unethical research conduct;
absence of required ethical approval;
misuse of confidential information;
inappropriate research involving vulnerable populations;
unethical animal research; or
other serious ethical breaches.

4. Technicalities to Achieve and Materialise the Policies

4.1 Ethics Statement in the Manuscript

Where ethical approval or exemption is relevant, authors should include an Ethics Statement in the manuscript.

A typical statement may be:

Ethical Approval: This study received ethical approval from the [Name of Institution/Committee], approval number [number], dated [date].

Where formal approval was not required:

Ethical Considerations: Formal ethical approval was not required for this study because the research used publicly available literary and archival materials and did not involve human participants or private personal information.

The statement must accurately reflect the actual ethical status of the research.

4.2 Human Participant Ethics Statement

For research involving human participants:

Ethical Approval: This study was approved by the [Name of Ethics Committee/Institution], approval number [number].

Where applicable:

Informed Consent: Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to participation. Participants were informed about the purpose of the study, the use of their information, and the possibility of publication.

4.3 Consent to Publication Statement

Where identifiable information is published:

Consent for Publication: Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s) whose identifiable information, image, quotation, or other personal material appears in this article.

The wording should be adapted to the circumstances.

4.4 Minor Participants

For research involving minors:

Consent: Appropriate parental or guardian consent was obtained for participation and publication. Assent was obtained from participants where developmentally appropriate.

4.5 Exemption Statement

Where an institution has determined that ethics approval is not required:

Ethical Approval: This study was reviewed by [Institution/Committee] and determined to be exempt from formal ethical review under the applicable institutional requirements.

Authors should not use the term "exempt" unless an appropriate institution or authority has actually determined the exemption.

4.6 No Ethics Approval Applicable

Where no institutional ethics process applies:

Ethical Considerations: This study did not involve human participants, identifiable private information, animal research, or other research activities requiring formal ethical approval under the applicable institutional framework.

The authors remain responsible for ensuring that this statement is accurate.

4.7 Evidence of Ethical Approval

MAJIS may request:

ethics approval letters;
exemption letters;
protocol numbers;
consent documentation;
institutional determinations;
relevant permissions; or
other evidence of ethical compliance.

Such documents should normally be provided confidentially to the editorial office rather than included in the publicly accessible manuscript.

4.8 Verification of Consent

For identifiable persons, the editorial office may request confirmation that consent to publication was obtained.

The journal normally does not require the manuscript submission to contain copies of consent forms unless necessary for verification.

4.9 Consent Forms and Confidentiality

Authors must not unnecessarily submit documents containing sensitive personal information.

Where verification is required, authors should redact information that is not necessary for confirming consent.

4.10 Editorial Assessment

At submission, the editorial office may assess whether:

an ethics statement is required;
the statement is present;
the reported approval is plausible and sufficiently specific;
consent is required;
identifiable information is included;
vulnerable populations are involved; and
additional documentation may be necessary.

4.11 Peer Review and Ethical Oversight

Reviewers may identify ethical concerns in a manuscript.

Reviewers should not independently contact research participants or institutions regarding an ethical concern.

Instead, reviewers should confidentially notify the handling editor.

The editor will determine whether further investigation is necessary.

4.12 Ethical Concern During Peer Review

If an ethical concern arises before publication, MAJIS may:

request clarification from the authors;
request ethical approval documentation;
request evidence of consent;
consult an independent ethics expert;
contact the relevant institution where appropriate;
suspend the review process;
reject the manuscript; or
take another appropriate action.

4.13 Ethical Concern After Publication

When a credible ethical concern arises after publication, MAJIS may:

conduct a preliminary assessment;
contact the authors;
request relevant documentation;
consult an independent expert or ethics body;
contact the relevant institution where appropriate;
issue a correction;
publish an editorial note;
issue an Expression of Concern; or
retract the article where the ethical breach materially undermines the publication.

4.14 Institutional Cooperation

Where a serious ethical concern concerns the conduct of research rather than merely the published article, MAJIS may contact the relevant:

university;
research institution;
ethics committee;
employer;
funder; or
other competent authority.

The journal may request that the institution investigate the underlying research conduct.

4.15 Confidentiality During Ethical Investigations

Information concerning ethical investigations should be handled confidentially.

Information should be disclosed only to individuals who need it to assess or resolve the matter, subject to:

legal requirements;
institutional procedures;
participant protection; and
publication-ethics obligations.

5. Responsibilities

5.1 Authors

Authors are responsible for:

identifying ethical issues before conducting and submitting research;
obtaining required ethical approval;
obtaining informed consent;
obtaining consent to publication where required;
protecting participant confidentiality;
protecting vulnerable participants;
complying with applicable laws and institutional policies;
accurately reporting ethical approval or exemption;
retaining appropriate evidence of ethical compliance; and
responding to editorial requests concerning ethical oversight.

5.2 Corresponding Author

The corresponding author should ensure that:

all authors are aware of the ethical requirements;
the ethics statement is accurate;
approval information is correctly reported;
required consent has been obtained;
relevant documentation can be provided if requested; and
ethical concerns identified after submission or publication are communicated to the journal.

5.3 Reviewers

Reviewers should:

identify apparent ethical concerns;
maintain confidentiality;
avoid contacting participants directly;
communicate concerns to the editor;
avoid making unsupported allegations; and
provide evidence or reasoning where an ethical concern is raised.

5.4 Editors

Editors are responsible for:

assessing ethical concerns fairly;
requesting clarification where necessary;
protecting confidential information;
seeking independent advice where appropriate;
contacting institutions when justified;
ensuring that ethical concerns are not ignored; and
taking appropriate action to protect participants and the integrity of the scholarly record.

5.5 Editorial Office

The editorial office should:

collect relevant ethics statements;
maintain confidential records;
support verification procedures;
protect sensitive documentation;
ensure that ethical concerns are appropriately escalated; and
maintain communication with authors and relevant authorities where necessary.

6. Special Considerations for Literary and Humanities Research

6.1 Literary Texts

Research based exclusively on published literary texts generally does not require human-participant consent merely because the text depicts real or fictional persons.

However, authors should distinguish between:

fictional characters;
historical persons;
living identifiable individuals;
autobiographical materials; and
privately supplied materials.

The ethical requirements may differ substantially between these categories.

6.2 Literary Works Based on Real Persons

Where an author analyses a literary work that portrays an identifiable living person, the publication of the scholarly analysis does not automatically require that person's consent.

However, authors should consider:

whether they introduce new personal information;
whether they disclose private information;
whether identification creates foreseeable harm; and
whether the information is already legitimately public.

6.3 Interviews With Authors, Writers, Teachers, or Researchers

Where MAJIS articles include interviews with authors, literary scholars, teachers, researchers, or other individuals, authors should obtain appropriate consent for:

participation;
recording;
quotation;
identification; and
publication.

6.4 Oral Literature

Studies of oral literature may involve living knowledge holders, performers, cultural custodians, communities, or other contributors.

Authors should consider both individual and community-level ethical obligations.

Particular attention should be given to:

ownership;
attribution;
cultural restrictions;
consent;
benefit sharing where applicable;
recording;
reproduction; and
publication.

6.5 Historical and Archival Research

Historical research may involve deceased individuals and archival materials that contain sensitive personal information.

Researchers should comply with applicable archival conditions and consider whether historical distance eliminates, reduces, or leaves intact relevant ethical responsibilities.

6.6 Educational Research

Research involving students or teachers should consider the potential power imbalance between:

researcher and student;
teacher and student;
supervisor and student; and
institution and participant.

Participation should not affect academic evaluation or access to educational opportunities.

6.7 Digital Humanities

Digital humanities projects involving:

social-media data;
online communities;
user-generated content;
digital archives;
web scraping; or
platform data

should consider privacy, consent, platform restrictions, copyright, and the possibility of re-identification.

7. Ethical Oversight and Publication Decisions

Ethical compliance forms part of MAJIS's editorial assessment.

A manuscript may be rejected or publication may be suspended when:

required ethical approval was not obtained;
informed consent was not obtained where required;
consent to publication is absent where necessary;
confidential information has been improperly disclosed;
vulnerable participants have been exposed to unreasonable risk;
animal research violates applicable ethical standards;
the authors provide materially misleading ethics information; or
another serious ethical breach is identified.

An ethical concern does not automatically establish research misconduct. The journal will assess the circumstances and evidence before making an editorial determination.

8. Post-Publication Ethical Concerns

If an ethical problem is discovered after publication, MAJIS will prioritise:

protection of affected individuals;
assessment of the reliability of the published record;
appropriate communication with authors and institutions;
transparency regarding necessary corrections; and
preservation of the integrity of the scholarly record.

Possible editorial actions include:

no action where the concern is unsupported;
correction;
editorial note;
removal or redaction of unnecessary personal information where technically and ethically appropriate;
Expression of Concern; or
retraction.

Retraction may be appropriate where the ethical breach materially undermines the validity, legitimacy, or integrity of the published research.

9. Relationship with Other MAJIS Policies

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

Allegations of Misconduct;
Conflicts of Interest;
Data and Reproducibility;
Intellectual Property;
Authorship and Contributorship;
Peer Review Process;
Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections;
Retraction and Expression of Concern; and
Generative AI Policy.

Where an ethical concern also constitutes possible research or publication misconduct, MAJIS may apply the procedures established in its Allegations of Misconduct policy.

10. COPE Resources

MAJIS's Ethical Oversight Policy is based on the COPE Core Practice on Ethical Oversight.

COPE identifies the following areas as part of ethical oversight:

consent to publication;
publication involving vulnerable populations;
ethical conduct of research involving animals;
ethical conduct of research involving human subjects;
handling of confidential data; and
other relevant ethical considerations.

Relevant COPE resources include:

COPE Core Practice: Ethical Oversight
COPE guidance on consent to publication
COPE guidance concerning vulnerable populations
COPE guidance concerning research involving human subjects
COPE guidance concerning confidential data
COPE guidance concerning animal research
COPE flowcharts concerning ethical concerns and consent
COPE guidance on handling concerns about published research

The COPE Core Practices provide the framework for journal and publisher policies, while detailed ethical requirements may also arise from applicable institutional, national, professional, and disciplinary standards.

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

11. Final Statement

MAJIS recognises that ethical oversight is an essential component of responsible scholarly publishing.

The absence of conventional laboratory or clinical research does not automatically eliminate ethical responsibilities. Literary and humanities research may involve people, personal information, vulnerable communities, cultural materials, archival sources, interviews, digital environments, and other materials requiring careful ethical consideration.

MAJIS therefore requires authors to assess the ethical implications of their research, obtain appropriate ethical approval where required, obtain informed consent and consent to publication where applicable, protect confidential and sensitive information, and accurately report their ethical oversight arrangements.

Where formal ethics approval is not applicable, authors should provide an appropriate explanation rather than assuming that no ethical consideration exists.

MAJIS will assess ethical concerns fairly and proportionately. Where credible concerns arise, the journal may request supporting documentation, consult relevant experts or institutions, and take appropriate editorial action to protect research participants and maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

This policy has been developed with reference to the COPE Core Practice on Ethical Oversight and related publication-ethics guidance. It does not constitute or imply COPE approval, certification, or endorsement.