Academic Integrity & Retraction

Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics Complaint Procedure

1. General Provisions and Principles

This Procedure defines the process for submitting, registering, and reviewing complaints regarding ethical violations in the editorial and publishing activities of the Journal. The Editorial Board’s operations are governed by the following core principles:

  • Fairness and Objectivity: All parties involved in a conflict have the right to be heard and to provide evidence in their defense.

  • Confidentiality: Protection of personal data and the integrity of the investigation process at all stages.

  • Timeliness: Complaints are reviewed within established timeframes without compromising the quality of the expert evaluation.

  • Presumption of Innocence: No violation is presumed until a fact of misconduct is officially established.

  • Absence of Conflict of Interest: Individuals with a personal or professional interest in the outcome of a case are recused from the investigation.

2. Grounds for Filing a Complaint

Complaints may be lodged upon the identification of the following violations:

  • Plagiarism and Self-plagiarism: Unauthorized appropriation of ideas, texts, or paraphrasing without proper attribution.

  • Data Manipulation: Fabrication or falsification of source data, distortion of citations, or misrepresentation of historical facts.

  • Authorship Violations: Unattributed, "ghost," or "guest" authorship, and other breaches of copyright.

  • Unethical Conduct: Undisclosed conflicts of interest, manipulation of the peer-review process, or discriminatory behavior.

3. Submission and Registration of Complaints

3.1. A complaint may be submitted by any stakeholder (author, reader, reviewer) in written form to the official editorial email address.

3.2. Content Requirements:

  • Full name and contact details of the complainant.

  • A link to the publication or manuscript that is the subject of the complaint.

  • A detailed description of the nature of the violation, supported by evidence (e.g., comparative tables, links to original sources).

  • Anonymous complaints shall be considered only if they contain compelling and verifiable facts. In general, anonymous submissions will not be processed.

  • All complaints are formally registered, assigned a reference number, and timestamped.

4. Stages of Review and Investigation

Stage 1: Preliminary Analysis The Editor-in-Chief conducts an initial assessment within 5–14 days. This stage determines the merit of the allegations and whether the matter falls within the Journal’s jurisdiction. The complainant will receive either a notice of registration or a reasoned refusal.

Stage 2: Formal Investigation In cases of serious allegations, the Editor-in-Chief shall establish an ad hoc committee consisting of 2–3 independent experts free from conflicts of interest.

  • Committee Actions: Evidence gathering, analysis of correspondence, and consultation with external reviewers.

  • Rights of the Parties: The individual against whom the complaint is filed shall be officially notified and granted the right to provide a written explanation.

  • Timeline: The investigation typically concludes within 20–30 days.

5. Decision Making and Sanctions

Based on the investigation results, the committee prepares a conclusion for approval by the Editor-in-Chief. Potential outcomes include:

  1. Complaint Unsubstantiated: The case is closed, and all parties are notified.

  2. Minor Violation: A requirement for the authors to issue a formal correction (Erratum).

  3. Substantial Violation:

    • Rejection of the manuscript.

    • Retraction of the published article with a mandatory public statement of reasons on the Journal's website.

    • A temporary or permanent ban on future submissions to the Journal.

    • Notification of the author’s home institution or employer.

6. Appeals and Documentation

  • Right to Appeal: Involved parties may appeal to the Editor-in-Chief within 14 days if substantial new evidence is identified. The Editor-in-Chief’s decision regarding the appeal is final.

  • Archiving: All case materials (evidence, correspondence, and minutes) are stored confidentially by the editorial office for the duration specified by COPE standards.

 

Procedure for Retraction of Published Materials

The Editorial Board of our publication is committed to strict adherence to academic integrity and ethical standards. The retraction procedure is a formal mechanism used to correct published information and notify the scientific community that an article contains critical errors or violations that undermine its scholarly value.

We are guided by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and other international standards to ensure transparency and objectivity throughout this process.

  1. Grounds for Retraction

A decision to formally retract a publication may be made in the event of the following significant violations:

  • Breach of Academic Integrity: Detection of plagiarism, misappropriation of others' research results, or self-plagiarism.
  • Falsification and Fabrication: Proven instances of data or image manipulation, or intentional distortion of experimental results.
  • Redundant (Duplicate) Publication: If the article has already been published in another venue without proper justification and permission.
  • Ethical and Legal Violations: Conducting research in violation of professional codes, copyright infringement, or breach of confidentiality.
  • Authorship Disputes: Establishing facts of "gift" (fictitious) authorship or the exclusion of actual contributors to the research.
  • Unreliable Results: Discovery of major errors that completely invalidate the findings and conclusions of the work.
  • AI and Peer Review Manipulation: Undisclosed use of Artificial Intelligence contrary to journal policy or proven compromise of the peer-review process.
  1. Initiation and Review Procedure

The procedure may be initiated upon request by the authors, members of the Editorial Board, reviewers, or third parties (readers, representatives of higher education institutions, or research organizations).

The process consists of the following stages:

  1. Submission of Complaint: The claimant sends a reasoned written appeal with evidence of violations to the editorial email address.
  2. Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board evaluate the validity of the claims. If necessary, a special commission is formed, or independent experts are consulted.
  3. Communication with Authors: Authors are mandatory notified of the claims and provided an opportunity to submit written explanations within 30 calendar days.
  4. Decision Making: The final verdict (to dismiss the complaint, issue a correction, or retract the article) is made by the Editor-in-Chief or the Editorial Board collectively.

Appeals: Authors have the right to appeal a retraction decision within 30 days of notification.

  1. Formal Implementation of Retraction

If a retraction decision is reached, the Editorial Board takes the following steps to inform the community:

  • Watermarking: A "RETRACTED" watermark and a corresponding notice with the date are added to the article's webpage on the journal's website.
  • Retraction Notice: A separate formal statement is published on the website, clearly stating the reasons for the retraction and the parties who initiated the procedure.
  • Notification of Databases: Information regarding the retraction is transmitted to the scientometric databases where the journal is indexed.
  1. Alternative Measures: Corrections and Expressions of Concern

If the identified violations are not critical, the Editorial Board may apply less severe measures:

  • Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum): Applied in case of minor technical errors in formulas, tables, or the author list that do not alter the overall conclusions of the research.
  1. Withdrawal of Manuscript Prior to Publication

Authors may withdraw their manuscript during the peer-review or pre-printing stages. To do so, a written request signed by all co-authors must be submitted, explaining the reasons. In such cases, the manuscript is fully removed from the publishing database, ad the copyrights remain with the authors.

  1. Consequences and Liability

Retraction does not exempt authors from responsibility for violations of scientific ethics. The Editorial Board reserves the right to:

  • Impose a temporary or permanent ban on the authors from submitting new manuscripts to the publication.
  • Formally notify the authors' home institution regarding the established facts of misconduct.
  • Refuse to consider complaints submitted in an inappropriate or offensive manner.

We strive for maximum transparency; therefore, every appeal is considered individually within 10 business days.