Manuscript Submission

Every submission is scanned for both plagiarism and AI-generated content before editorial screening.

Check 1: Plagiarism
A similarity score of 15% or higher will be rejected automatically.

Check 2: AI-Generated Content
Manuscripts with 15% or higher AI generated content will be flagged automatically before being sent to the editor. Authors will be notified and requested to submit an AI Usage Statement in order to proceed to review.

The Editor of IAFOR Journal of Literature & Librarianship states that manuscripts with an AI-generation content score of 15% or higher are unlikely to reach the publication stage.

Please note: PRE-SCREENING OF SUBMISSIONS WILL BE STRINGENT

1. Articles that do not follow our guidelines and APA style will be rejected. Regular articles are expected to be between 4,000 and 7,000 words in length from introduction to conclusion, NOT including references/footnotes/tables/figures; abstract 250 words maximum, 3-6 keywords. Short articles should be between 1,500 and 2,500 words in length (from introduction to conclusion, NOT including tables, figures, footnotes, and references; no abstract/keywords needed).
2. We do not send to reviewers papers with a similarity index higher than 15% (submissions should not be a collection of quotes, even if properly cited and referenced). Furthermore, in the field of literature, we won’t select papers that paraphrase and summarize without quoting primary and secondary sources.
3. We will reject submissions that are not about literature or librarianship.
4. Manuscripts that offer long synopses of literary texts, along with critical analyses with derivative conclusions, are discouraged from submission. These papers are very unlikely to reach the publication stage.
5. The IAFOR Journal of Literature & Librarianship is an international endeavour with an international audience. This means that papers may be rejected to maintain the journal’s Internationality when there is a disproportionately high number of submissions from one country.
6. Submissions must be professionally edited and proofread before submission. Please seek the help of an expert and native speaker in the field. These standards are non-negotiable and strictly enforced by the editor of the IAFOR Journal of Literature & Librarianship.

AI Tools and Authorship

IAFOR follows COPE’s Position Statement on this matter:

“The use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT or Large Language Models in research publications is expanding rapidly. COPE joins organisations, such as WAME and the JAMA Network among others, to state that AI tools cannot be listed as an author of a paper.

Official statement of COPE: Authorship and AI tools: https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author

Both the WAME guidance and COPE’s own position statement concur: AI bots should not be permitted as authors since they have no legal standing and so cannot hold copyright, be sued, or sign off on a piece of research as original. Springer Nature and Taylor & Francis have both come out with similar statements, asking authors to specify the nature of any interactions with AI in methods or acknowledgement sections.”https://publicationethics.org/news/artificial-intelligence-and-authorship

ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00107-z

Authors who use AI tools in the writing of a manuscript, production of images or graphical elements of the paper, or in the collection and analysis of data, must be transparent in disclosing in the Materials and Methods (or similar section) of the paper how the AI tool was used and which tool was used. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by an AI tool, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics.”(COPE, February 2023)

COPE Guidelines:
Authorship and contributorship
Authorship Discussion Document (Key Points on Authorship
Authorship disputes How to Handle Authorship Disputes
Authorship and AI (COPE position statement February 2023)
How potential authorship disputes are managed

Because we receive so many submissions, we generally won’t be able to offer detailed feedback on the reasons why an article is not accepted.

For papers that are selected for review:

Submissions that receive one positive and one negative feedback will be sent to one more reviewer. If the third review is negative, the paper is rejected. Papers that receive two negative reviews are rejected.

We do not offer short peer review times, although reviewers are requested to return their review within 3 weeks. The editorial process may take more time (sometimes considerably) when there are extenuating circumstances, such as conflicts with the evaluators’ teaching duties at the beginning or end of an academic semester.