We encourage all peer reviewers to make every effort to follow the ethical guidelines outlined below when reviewing articles for the Journal of Language and Education:

(1) Reviewers should evaluate each manuscript fairly and impartially, assessing it based on its own merits without considering the author's race, religion, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation.

(2) Reviewers are expected to disclose any potential conflicts of interest, whether personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious, before agreeing to review a manuscript, especially if such conflicts could affect their impartiality.

(3) The peer review process must remain confidential, and any information or communication regarding the manuscript should not be shared with individuals outside of the review process.

(4) Reviewers should provide a thorough, constructive, and well-supported review, offering feedback that will assist the authors in improving their manuscript. Reviewers should clearly articulate their opinions with evidence and indicate which additional research is necessary to support the manuscript's claims and which would enhance or broaden the work. Reviewers must ensure that their comments and recommendations to the editor align with the feedback provided to the authors.

(5) Reviews must be conducted objectively, avoiding any hostile or inflammatory language. Reviewers should refrain from making remarks that could be interpreted as damaging to anyone's reputation. Personal attacks on the author are inappropriate.

(6) Reviewers should be sensitive to the challenges authors face when writing in a language that is not their own and should phrase their feedback with care and respect.

(7) Reviewers should not suggest citations to their own work or that of their colleagues solely to boost citation counts or visibility. Such recommendations should be made only when they are academically or technically justified.

(8) If a reviewer feels unqualified to assess the research in a manuscript, they should inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.

(9) Reviewers should strive to submit their evaluations and recommendations within the agreed-upon timeframe, notifying the editor if this is not feasible.

(10) Reviewers should identify any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any claim that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be backed by the appropriate citation. Reviewers should also inform the journal editor of any substantial similarities between the manuscript under review and any published or submitted work they are aware of.

(11) Unpublished data disclosed in a manuscript should not be used in a reviewer's own research without the author's explicit written permission. Confidential information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept private and should not be exploited for personal gain.