Publication policy

Ethics guidelines of the editorial board are based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics and the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA).

Ethical Responsibilities of the Editorial Board

The editorial board is responsible for ensuring the quality and academic integrity of published materials. In particular, the editors:

  • make decisions on manuscript publication based on scholarly value, relevance, and originality;
  • ensure an objective, unbiased, and confidential peer review process;
  • prevent any form of discrimination based on gender, race, nationality, religion, or political beliefs;
  • maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and do not disclose information to third parties;
  • respond appropriately to cases of academic misconduct (plagiarism, data falsification, duplicate publication);
  • avoid conflicts of interest and ensure transparency in editorial decisions.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors submitting manuscripts to the journal are required to:

  • submit original research that has not been previously published or submitted elsewhere;
  • properly cite all sources and avoid plagiarism in any form;
  • present accurate research results and avoid fabrication or manipulation of data;
  • include as co-authors only those who have made a significant contribution to the research;
  • disclose any potential conflicts of interest;
  • promptly inform the editorial office about any errors discovered in their published work;
  • adhere to ethical standards when conducting research involving human participants or sensitive data.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining the quality of publications and are expected to:

  • provide objective, well-reasoned, and timely reviews;
  • maintain the confidentiality of the peer review process and not use unpublished materials for personal benefit;
  • identify relevant publications that have not been cited by the authors;
  • inform the editors about any suspected cases of academic misconduct (plagiarism, duplication, etc.);
  • avoid conflicts of interest and decline the review if such conflicts exist.

Compliance with DORA Principles and Recommendations

The journal supports the principles of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) and adheres to responsible research assessment practices in line with international scholarly publishing standards.

In accordance with DORA, research evaluation is based primarily on the scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, and scholarly contribution of the work, rather than on journal-based metrics such as impact factor or other quantitative indicators.

The journal’s editorial policy promotes transparent and fair peer review, the responsible use of bibliometric indicators, and the recognition of the diversity of research outputs, including articles, datasets, software, and other forms of scholarly contribution.

The journal encourages authors and reviewers to follow responsible research assessment practices, avoiding overreliance on bibliometric metrics and focusing on the content and scientific significance of the research.

Procedure for Handling Complaints
Regarding Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics

All complaints concerning possible ethical violations are handled fairly, impartially, and confidentially. A complaint must be submitted in written form to the official editorial email address. It should include:

  • a clear description of the alleged violation;
  • reference to the publication or materials in question;
  • supporting evidence, if available;
  • contact details of the complainant.

Anonymous complaints may be considered if they contain sufficient and substantiated information.

The editorial office conducts a preliminary assessment to determine whether the complaint is substantiated and falls within the journal’s scope. The complainant receives confirmation of receipt or a notification explaining the reasons for non-consideration.

If necessary, an ethics committee is established or independent experts are consulted. All involved parties (authors, reviewers, etc.) may be asked to provide explanations and additional materials.

Based on the investigation results, the editorial board may decide to:

  • reject the complaint as unsubstantiated;
  • issue corrections to the publication;
  • publish a correction or retraction;
  • apply other measures in accordance with the journal’s ethical policy.

The complainant is informed in writing about the outcome of the review process. Complaints are normally reviewed within 30 calendar days of receipt, depending on the complexity of the case.

All materials related to the complaint are treated as confidential, and decisions are made solely on the basis of evidence and principles of academic integrity.

Retraction Policy for Published Articles

Retraction is applied in cases where serious ethical violations or unreliability of research findings are identified.

An article may be retracted in cases of:

  • plagiarism or self-plagiarism;
  • data fabrication or falsification;
  • significant errors that affect the validity of the results;
  • copyright violations;
  • other serious breaches of publication ethics.

The decision to retract an article is made by the editorial board after a thorough review of all circumstances and, where necessary, with the involvement of independent experts. Authors are informed about the initiation of the procedure and are given an opportunity to provide explanations.

If retraction is approved, the article remains accessible on the journal’s website but is clearly marked as "Retracted". The reasons for retraction are explicitly stated in the corresponding notice.

The journal ensures transparency of the retraction process and adherence to principles of academic integrity at all stages of review and decision-making.

Artificial Intelligence Use Policy

The journal permits the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools as supporting instruments in the preparation of manuscripts. In particular, AI may be used for language editing, grammar checking, stylistic improvement, technical text processing, or assisting in data analysis.

However, AI cannot be used as a source of scientific conclusions or as a substitute for the author’s research work. All interpretations of results, formulation of conclusions, and responsibility for the content of the manuscript remain entirely with the authors.

The use of AI to generate scientific data, produce falsified results, or mislead readers is strictly prohibited and is considered a violation of publication ethics.

If AI tools are used, authors are required to disclose this in the manuscript, including a brief description of how they were applied.

Ethical Approval Policy for Research

The journal adheres to international ethical standards for conducting scientific research and requires that all submitted materials comply with the principles of academic integrity and ethical norms.

It is noted that, in accordance with international requirements, manuscripts reporting empirical research involving human participants or animals must include a clear description of how written informed consent was obtained from the study participants, as well as information about the institution that approved the ethical aspects of the research. For example: "The collection of written consent to participate in the study took place together with the main survey (in paper form / in the form of an electronic signature)." "The ethical approval of the research project was confirmed by the Ethics Commission of the National Psychological Association (Protocol No. ... dated 00.00.0000)."

An article that contains a description of a clinical case should be set out, taking into account reservations to preserve the confidentiality of the client/patient. We advise authors of articles describing a clinical case to read the Code of Ethics of the NPA and contact colleagues for supervision or consultation about the possibility of changing or concealing certain details of the case for the protection of the client/patient.

The journal reserves the right to request additional information regarding ethical approval and to reject a manuscript in the event of identified violations of ethical standards.

Peer Review Procedure

The journal applies a double-blind peer review process, in which anonymity is maintained for both authors and reviewers. All submitted manuscripts undergo mandatory scholarly evaluation before a publication decision is made.

Reviewers are selected from among qualified experts with relevant academic credentials, publications in the appropriate field, and experience in peer review. They must not have any conflict of interest with the authors of the manuscript. Where necessary, external independent experts may be invited.

The standard review period is up to 4 weeks; however, it may be extended depending on the complexity of the manuscript or the need for additional evaluation.

Manuscripts are assessed according to the following key criteria:

  • scientific novelty and relevance of the research;
  • relevance to the journal’s scope;
  • soundness of methodology;
  • reliability of results and conclusions;
  • quality of structure and presentation;
  • compliance with ethical standards.

Review reports are provided in written form and include reasoned comments and recommendations from reviewers. All materials are archived by the editorial office and may be used for internal quality control purposes.

The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board based on peer review reports. Possible decisions include acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript. If necessary, the editorial board may request additional reviews.

Privacy Statement

Names and e-mail addresses entered on the site of this journal will be used exclusively for the purposes indicated in this journal and will not be used for any other purpose or provided to other persons and organizations.