Procedure for Reviewing Complaints Regarding Violations of Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics

The Editorial Board of the journal ensures a transparent and fair procedure for handling complaints related to potential violations of academic integrity and publication ethics. This protocol establishes the procedure for investigating complaints against authors, reviewers, or Editorial Board members regarding ethical breaches. It covers issues such as plagiarism, misappropriation of materials, conflicts of interest, data manipulation, and other forms of academic misconduct.

  1. Submitting a сomplaint

Complaints regarding potential misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, duplicate publication, copyright infringement, or conflict of interest) must be submitted electronically to the journal’s official email address. The complaint must specify the nature of the violation and, where possible, provide supporting evidence. Anonymous complaints will not be considered. A valid complaint must clearly include:

  • Applicant’s contact information;
  • A link to the publication or material under review;
  • A detailed description of the violation with references to evidence.
  1. Preliminary кeview

The Editor-in-Chief or an authorised member of the Editorial Board conducts an initial assessment of the complaint's merit. Within 5 working days, the authorised person verifies:

  • Whether the complaint falls within the journal’s scope;
  • The presence of sufficient grounds for further investigation.

The applicant will receive a notification regarding the registration of the complaint or a reasoned refusal to consider it.

  1. Expert investigation

If necessary, the Editorial Board engages independent experts or reviewers to conduct a further examination of the facts.

The Commission has the right to:

  • Request additional materials and explanations.
  • Involve independent experts.
  • Consult with all interested parties.

The investigation period shall not exceed 30 calendar days.

  1. Informing the parties

The author(s) of the manuscript are informed of the essence of the complaint and have the right to provide written explanations or reasoned objections.

  1. Decision making

Based on the results of the investigation, the Editorial Board issues a decision, which may include:

  • Rejecting the complaint as unsubstantiated.
  • Identifying a minor violation and suggesting corrections.
  • Identifying a significant violation and taking appropriate action.

Measures in cases of significant misconduct:

  • Rejection of the manuscript.
  • Retraction of an already published article.
  • A temporary ban on future submissions.
  • Reporting the violation to the author’s home institution.
  1. Confidentiality

All stages of the complaint process are conducted in accordance with the principles of confidentiality and impartiality.

  1. Protection of rights

All parties involved in the conflict have the right to:

  • Receive full information regarding the investigation process.
  • Present their explanations and evidence.
  • Appeal the Commission's decision.
  1. Appeals

The Commission's decision may be appealed to the Editor-in-Chief within 14 days. The Editor-in-Chief reviews the appeal within 10 working days. The decision of the Editor-in-Chief is final.

Editorial Board members are required to comply with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), and the journal's principles of publication ethics.