Procedure for Handling Integrity and Ethics Complaints
The Journal of Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University. Biology adheres to the principles of academic integrity, transparency, impartiality, confidentiality, and fair consideration of complaints. All complaints concerning possible breaches of publication ethics, research misconduct, or improper conduct by participants in the editorial process are handled in accordance with the journal’s ethical standards and COPE recommendations.
1. Purpose of the Procedure
This procedure sets out the process for submitting, registering, examining, and resolving complaints related to:
breaches of academic integrity;
violations of publication ethics;
improper conduct by authors, reviewers, editors, or other persons involved in the editorial process;
disputes concerning authorship, plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, conflicts of interest, breaches of confidentiality, or procedural unfairness.
2. Who May Submit a Complaint
A complaint may be submitted by:
an author or co-author of a manuscript or article;
a reviewer;
an editor;
a reader;
a representative of a research institution;
any other person or organization with reasonable grounds to believe that a breach of academic integrity or publication ethics has occurred.
3. Subject Matter of Complaints
A complaint may concern, in particular:
plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or improper appropriation of text or ideas;
fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data, images, or results;
duplicate or redundant publication;
improper authorship, unauthorized inclusion or exclusion of an author;
undisclosed conflicts of interest;
breaches of confidentiality in peer review;
biased or unethical editorial or peer review conduct;
violations of research ethics requirements;
other forms of scholarly or publishing misconduct.
4. Submission of a Complaint
A complaint should be submitted in writing through the official journal e-mail address or through the journal’s electronic system, where applicable.
The complaint should include:
the name and contact details of the complainant;
a clear description of the complaint;
a reference to the manuscript, article, or editorial procedure concerned;
any available evidence, documents, links, or other supporting materials.
Anonymous complaints may be considered if they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information.
5. Registration and Initial Assessment
Upon receipt of a complaint, the editorial office registers it and carries out a preliminary assessment to determine:
whether the complaint falls within the journal’s competence;
whether sufficient information has been provided;
whether there are grounds for further examination.
As a rule, the editorial office acknowledges receipt of the complaint within a reasonable period and informs the complainant whether the matter will proceed or whether additional information is required.
6. Persons Responsible for Review
Complaints are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief, the Executive Editor, and/or the editor directly involved in the relevant editorial process, depending on the nature of the case.
Where necessary, the Editor-in-Chief may:
involve members of the Editorial Board;
consult independent experts;
request explanations from authors, reviewers, editors, or other parties;
contact the author’s institution or another competent body.
Any person with an actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to the complaint must withdraw from the review of that case.
7. Review Procedure
In reviewing a complaint, the journal may:
examine the manuscript, article, reviews, editorial correspondence, and other relevant materials;
request written explanations from the parties concerned;
consult internally with the Editorial Board;
use COPE recommendations and flowcharts;
in complex cases, initiate additional review or temporarily suspend the editorial process until the matter is clarified.
The journal seeks to handle complaints impartially, confidentially, and without undue delay.
8. Possible Outcomes
Following review of the complaint, the journal may:
dismiss the complaint as unsubstantiated;
request clarification or corrective action from the parties involved;
require correction of a manuscript or published article;
publish a correction, editorial note, or expression of concern;
reject the manuscript;
reverse an editorial decision;
initiate additional or repeated peer review;
retract the article;
notify the author’s institution, publisher, or another authorized body of the findings.
9. Communication of the Decision
Following consideration of the complaint, the editorial office informs the complainant and, where appropriate, other relevant parties of the decision, subject to confidentiality, personal data protection, and editorial ethics requirements.
10. Appeals
If the complainant or another interested party disagrees with the decision, a reasoned written appeal may be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief.
Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief and, where necessary, by members of the Editorial Board who were not involved in the initial review. As a result of the appeal, the decision may be upheld, revised, or referred for additional consideration.
11. Confidentiality and Documentation
All complaints, explanations, editorial findings, and related materials are retained by the editorial office as part of the journal’s internal documentation. The journal ensures confidential handling of complaints to the extent compatible with fact-finding, due process, and ethical transparency.
