The Editorial Office considers complaints, requests, and appeals related to editorial decisions, the peer review process, authorship issues, conflicts of interest, plagiarism, duplicate publication, incorrect citation, falsification or fabrication of research results, and other possible violations of publication ethics. Such submissions are considered objectively, confidentially, and in accordance with the principles of academic integrity. This procedure is based on COPE recommendations, the ethical approaches of Elsevier and Springer Nature, and the principles of editorial transparency and good editorial practice considered in the evaluation of journals in the Web of Science Core Collection / Clarivate, particularly in relation to publication ethics.
General Provisions
A complaint may concern a submitted, reviewed, accepted, or already published material, as well as the actions of authors, reviewers, editors, or other persons involved in the editorial process. The journal considers only complaints that contain sufficiently specific information for a preliminary assessment of the circumstances of the case.
Complaints must be submitted to the Editorial Office in writing. The submission should preferably include the applicant’s full name, contact details, the subject of the complaint, the title of the article or manuscript, the authors’ names, a description of the alleged violation, and, where available, documents or other materials supporting the stated circumstances. Anonymous submissions may be considered if they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information.
Initial Consideration of a Complaint
After receiving a complaint, the Editorial Office conducts an initial assessment to determine:
- whether the issue raised falls within the competence of the journal;
- whether the submission contains sufficient facts for further analysis;
- whether the situation requires immediate action;
- whether there are grounds for opening an editorial investigation.
If a complaint is clearly unfounded, lacks sufficient information, or is not related to the journal’s editorial activities, the Editorial Office may decline further consideration and notify the applicant accordingly.
Main Review Procedure
If a complaint is accepted for consideration, the Editorial Office proceeds as follows:
- Records the submission in the journal’s internal editorial materials.
- Analyzes the submitted documents, manuscript, reviews, editorial correspondence, and other materials relevant to the case.
- If necessary, requests written explanations from the author, reviewer, editor, or another person involved.
- In complex or disputed cases, involves the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board, or external experts within the journal’s competence.
- If the matter goes beyond editorial assessment or requires an official institutional investigation, the Editorial Office may contact the author’s institution, employer, research funder, or another authorized body.
- Makes a decision and informs the applicant and interested parties to the extent permitted by confidentiality requirements.
Principles for Handling Complaints
When considering complaints, the Editorial Office follows these principles:
- impartiality — each complaint is evaluated on its merits, not on the status of the parties involved;
- confidentiality — case materials are not disclosed to third parties without proper grounds;
- right to respond — the person against whom the complaint is filed has the right to provide an explanation;
- due process — decisions are made after analysis of all available materials;
- proportionality — the response must correspond to the nature of the established violation;
- correction of the scholarly record — if a violation affects the reliability of a publication, the Editorial Office takes steps to correct it.
Possible Editorial Decisions
Following consideration of a complaint, the Editorial Office may make one or more of the following decisions:
- recognize the complaint as unfounded and close the case;
- request clarification or additional documents from the author or other persons;
- recommend revision of the manuscript;
- temporarily suspend editorial consideration of the article;
- reject the manuscript;
- publish a correction, editorial notice, or expression of concern;
- retract the article;
- notify the relevant institution or another competent authority.
Persons Authorized to Make Decisions
Decisions on complaints are made by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor who has no conflict of interest regarding the subject of the complaint. In complex, disputed, or high-profile cases, the matter may be referred to the Editorial Board. If the complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief, it must be considered by another authorized representative of the Editorial Office or the Editorial Board.
Timeframes and Notification of Results
The Editorial Office seeks to consider complaints within a reasonable timeframe, taking into account the complexity of the case, the volume of materials, and the need to obtain explanations or external opinions. The applicant usually receives confirmation that the complaint has been received and, after the review is completed, a notification of the outcome to the extent permitted by confidentiality and personal data protection requirements.
Appeals
A person who disagrees with the Editorial Office’s decision following consideration of a complaint may submit a reasoned appeal with additional explanations or new evidence. The appeal is reconsidered by the Editorial Office and, if necessary, with the involvement of the Editor-in-Chief or the Editorial Board.
