Review of complaints regarding violations of academic integrity, publication ethics and retraction procedure

The Editorial Board of the collection of scientific works «Pedagogical Discourse» reviews complaints regarding possible violations of academic integrity. We review complaints regarding authors, reviewers and members of the editorial board, guided by the recommendations of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and the current legislation of Ukraine.

Grounds for reviewing a complaint

The reason for initiating the review procedure may be well-founded suspicions or facts:

• plagiarism (assignment of authorship, text borrowing without references);
• self-plagiarism (duplication of one's own publications without proper citation);
• fabrication or falsification of pedagogical research results;
• manipulation of authorship (inclusion of persons who did not participate in the preparation of the article, or exclusion of real authors);
• failure to declare a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of the study or review;
• violation of the confidentiality of the review process, etc.

Procedure for submitting a complaint

Any person (author, reader, reviewer or representative of a third-party organization) may submit a complaint, observing the following requirements:

• submission form – the complaint is sent electronically to the official email of the editorial board (kgpa_nauka@ukr.net);
• content – the appeal must clearly indicate the title of the article, the names of the authors, the essence of the violation and provide evidence (for example, a link to the original sources in the case of plagiarism);

Review procedure

The review process is carried out according to the algorithm of “transparency and impartiality”:

1. Initial review – the editor-in-chief assesses the validity of the complaint within 5 working days.
2. Creation of a commission – a temporary ethics commission is created to study the materials, which may include independent experts.
3. Communication with the parties involved – the editorial board officially addresses the person against whom the complaint was filed, requesting an explanation.
4. Deadlines – the full consideration of the complaint lasts no more than 30 calendar days from the moment of its registration.

Decision based on the results of the consideration

Depending on the results of the consideration of the complaint, the editorial board may make one of the following decisions:

• rejection of the complaint due to the lack of evidence of a violation;
• warning by sending a letter to the author with a requirement to make corrections to future works;
• making corrections (Corrigendum) – publication of an official notice of correction of errors in an already published article.
• retraction (withdrawal of the article);
• restriction of cooperation – temporary or permanent ban on the author from publishing in the collection.

Appeal

If the applicant or author disagrees with the decision of the editorial board, he has the right to file an appeal within 14 days after receiving the official response. The appeal is considered by the editorial board.

 

RETRACTION

The editorial board has the right to withdraw (retract) a published article, provided that it is found to have violated someone's rights or generally accepted standards of scientific ethics, which meets the international standards of COPE Retraction Guidelines.

Retraction (withdrawal) of an already published article is a mechanism for correcting the scientific literature and notifying readers that the publication contains such serious shortcomings or erroneous data that its results cannot be trusted.

The purpose of retraction is not to punish authors; its main purpose is to ensure the integrity of scientific knowledge. The editorial board is guided by the principle that errors are a natural part of scientific research, but intentional manipulations or critical miscalculations should be publicly recorded.

Grounds for retraction

The editorial board initiates the procedure for retraction of an article in the following cases:

• detection of massive plagiarism (if after publication it turns out that a significant part of the material was borrowed from other sources without proper citation or permission);
• Scientific Misconduct (the presence of clear evidence that the results of the study are the result of falsification (fabrication of data) or fabrication (manipulation of existing data);
• unintentional errors with critical consequences (detection of honest errors (for example, miscalculations in the statistical processing of a pedagogical experiment or errors in calculations) that completely refute the conclusions of the article);
• duplicate publication (if the article was previously published in another publication without appropriate notification and consent of the editorial office (violation of the principle of originality);
• violation of research ethics (detection of facts of conducting research with a violation of confidentiality, which contradicts the principles of inclusivity and pedagogical ethics);
• concealment of a conflict of interest (if the undisclosed interests of the authors significantly influenced the interpretation of the results).

Mechanism and procedure for retraction

The process of retraction of an article goes through the following stages:

1. Preliminary review - after receiving information about possible violation (from readers, reviewers or the authors themselves) The Editor-in-Chief appoints an internal review. At this time, the article page on the official website of the collection of scientific works «Pedagogical Discourse» has the status «Article under investigation».
2. Communication with authors. The editor sends an official request to the authors with a request to provide an explanation. The authors have the right to admit the error and initiate a retraction on their own or to appeal the accusations.
3. Decision-making. If the evidence of the violation is confirmed, the decision to retraction is made at a meeting of the Editorial Board and recorded in the minutes.
4. Notification of interested parties: The editorial board officially informs:

– the authors and all co-authors of the publication;

– the institution (affiliation) where the work was performed.

Technical registration of the retraction on the website

According to international standards, the article is not physically removed from the site archive, but it is "marked" as follows:

• on the website, the title of the article is supplemented with the prefix «RETRACTED». The PDF file of the article is watermarked with «RETRACTED» on each page. The text of the article remains accessible, but is clearly identified as retracted;
• a notice of retraction (Retraction Note) – a separate text is published on the article page, indicating: who initiated the retraction, the reasons for the retraction and a link to the decision protocol;
• in the nearest printed/electronic issue of the collection «Pedagogical Discourse» information about the retraction of the article is published, indicating the title, authors and reasons.

Partial retraction and correction (Expression of Concern)

In cases where only a small part of the article contains an error that does not affect the overall conclusions, the Editorial Board may decide on a corrigendum/erratum – publication of an official correction without retracting the entire article.

Liability and appeal

Authors have the right to appeal the decision on retraction within 14 days from the moment of receiving the notice. Appeal is reviewed by an independent commission.