POLICY
Procedure for Handling Complaints Regarding Violations of Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics in the Scientific Journal "Kyiv Journal of Modern Psychology and Psychotherapy"

1. General Provisions

1.1. This Policy defines the procedure for submitting, reviewing, and resolving complaints, appeals, and reports concerning possible violations of academic integrity and/or publication ethics in the process of preparing, reviewing, editorial processing, and publishing materials in the scientific journal "Kyiv Journal of Modern Psychology and Psychotherapy".

1.2. The purpose of this Policy is to ensure compliance with the principles of academic integrity, objectivity, transparency, impartiality, and responsibility of all participants in the publication process, as well as to maintain trust in the scientific results published in the journal.

1.3. The complaints review procedure is based on internationally recognised standards of publication ethics (in particular, the recommendations of COPE) and the journal’s internal editorial policies.

2. Scope of Application

2.1. This Policy applies to complaints concerning:

a) authors and co-authors of manuscripts and published articles;

b) reviewers;

c) members of the editorial board;

d) editorial procedures and decisions;

e) published materials or materials submitted for publication.

2.2. The Policy applies both to manuscripts under review and to materials already published in the journal.

3. Grounds for Filing Complaints

3.1. Grounds for filing a complaint include, but are not limited to, substantiated suspicion or detection of the following violations:

a) plagiarism, self-plagiarism, improper citation;

b) fabrication, falsification, or data manipulation;

c) duplicate publication of already published articles or articles simultaneously submitted to multiple journals;

d) violation of authorship principles or improper designation of authors;

e) undeclared or falsely declared conflict of interest;

f) violation of ethical norms and/or standards for conducting research;

g) biased, unethical, or improper review;

h) abuse of editorial authority;

i) breach of confidentiality;

j) bias or harmful actions and/or abuse of privileged information;

k) other violations of academic integrity and publication ethics;

l) violations in editorial processes;

m) improper conduct of journal staff.

4. Filing Complaints

4.1. A complaint may be filed by any natural or legal person who has substantiated grounds to believe that a violation of academic integrity or publication ethics has occurred.

4.2. A complaint is submitted to the journal’s editorial office in written form (by email or through official communication channels) and must contain:

a) a clear description of the substance of the complaint;

b) references to the relevant material or actions;

c) available evidence or justification;

d) contact details of the complainant (anonymous complaints may be considered if there is sufficient evidence).

4.3. The editorial office acknowledges receipt of the complaint within 5 working days.

4.4. Filing knowingly false complaints or complaints with malicious intent may result in restricting the person’s right to file complaints in the future and/or notifying relevant institutions of unethical conduct.

5. Preliminary Review of Complaints

5.1. The Editor-in-Chief or an authorised member of the editorial board conducts an initial assessment of the complaint to determine:

a) its compliance with the scope of this Policy;

b) the existence of sufficient grounds for further consideration.

5.2. In the event of the complaint being unfounded or not complying with the requirements of this Policy, the editorial office has the right to reject it with appropriate notification to the complainant.

5.3. In the event of insufficient data, the complainant may be invited to provide additional information.

5.4. If the complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the preliminary review is conducted by the Deputy Editor-in-Chief or a senior member of the editorial board designated by the editorial board. If the complaint concerns another member of the editorial board, that member is excluded from the complaint review process at all stages.

6. Main Review Procedure

6.1. Upon acceptance of a complaint for review, the editorial office initiates an internal investigation, which may include:

a) analysis of evidence or justification of the complaint;

b) consideration of the nature of the violation, its scale, and consequences;

c) verification using specialised tools (including plagiarism detection systems, systems for detecting texts written by artificial intelligence);

d) involvement of independent experts or members of the editorial board;

e) establishment of a committee of 3 or 5 independent experts to assess factual data and formulate a conclusion by simple majority vote. The committee is formed taking into account the following criteria:

• • unblemished reputation;
  • absence of conflict of interest with all parties to the complaint;
  • possession of relevant competence in the subject matter or nature of the complaint (for example, in the field of scientific content, editorial processes, publication ethics);
  • experience in dealing with issues of academic integrity (if possible).

6.2. The author(s), reviewer(s), or other interested parties are informed of the substance of the complaint and have the right to provide written explanations within the deadline established by the editorial office.

6.3. The review of the complaint is conducted in accordance with the principles of confidentiality, impartiality, and equality of the parties.

6.4. The review of a complaint should last no more than 30 calendar days, after which the complainant receives a response with the results. In cases requiring additional expertise, involvement of external specialists or international consultations, the period may be extended to 90 calendar days, and in cases of court proceedings to an even longer period, with mandatory notification to the complainant of the reasons for the extension. In this case, the complainant will receive interim updates on the status of the complaint until the final results are obtained.

6.5. In the event of detecting violations concerning multiple journals (duplicate publication, plagiarism of materials from other publications), the editorial office undertakes to notify the relevant editorial offices for coordination of actions in accordance with COPE recommendations.

6.6. Preprints deposited in recognised repositories (arXiv, bioRxiv, PsyArXiv, etc.) are not considered prior publication if the authors have properly declared their existence at the time of manuscript submission.

7. Decisions Following Review

7.1. Following the review of a complaint, the editorial board may adopt one or more of the following decisions:

a) to find the complaint unfounded and close the review;

b) to recommend a correction or the publication of an explanatory note;

c) to publish an expression of concern;

d) to reject the manuscript;

e) to adopt a decision on retraction of a published article;

f) to refuse the author further publications in the journal for a specified period;

g) to notify relevant law enforcement agencies (in cases of suspected criminal offences), scientific and/or educational institutions in cases of serious violations of academic integrity.

7.2. The editorial office’s decision is formalised in minutes or an official decision of the editorial board and brought to the attention of the interested parties.

7.3. The decision on article retraction is published in the next issue of the journal with full justification of the reasons and indication of the bibliographic data of the retracted publication. Information about the retraction may be entered into international databases (including Retraction Watch Database, CrossRef) within established deadlines.

7.4. In cases of serious violations (plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate publication), the editorial office may inform:

• the institution where the author works/studies;
• relevant scientific or professional associations;
• editorial offices of other journals if the violation concerns multiple publications;
• scientometric databases to mark the problematic publication.

7.5. The editorial office reserves the right to consider comments and remarks from the scientific community after publication (post-publication peer review) as grounds for reviewing published materials in accordance with the procedures defined by this Policy.

8. Appeals

8.1. The author(s) or other parties have the right to submit an appeal against the editorial office’s decision within 14 calendar days from the moment of receiving notification of the editorial office’s decision.

8.2. The appeal is reviewed again by the editorial board with mandatory involvement of independent experts who did not participate in the initial review. The period for reviewing the appeal is no more than 30 calendar days. In cases requiring additional expertise, involvement of external specialists or international consultations, the period may be extended, with mandatory notification to the complainant of the reasons for the extension. In this case, the complainant will receive interim updates on the status of the complaint every two weeks until the final results are obtained.

8.3. The decision on the appeal is final and is not subject to further appeal within editorial procedures.

9. Principles of the Procedure

9.1. The complaints review procedure is based on the following principles:

a) legality and compliance with international ethical standards;

b) objectivity and impartiality;

c) transparency of decisions;

d) confidentiality of information;

e) respect for the rights and dignity of all parties.

9.2. The procedure is based on the principles of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

10. Final Provisions

10.1. This Policy enters into force from the moment of its publication on the official website of the journal.

10.2. The editorial office reserves the right to introduce changes and additions to this Policy for the purpose of updating it in accordance with the development of international and national standards of publication ethics. The current version of the Policy is published on the official website of the journal.

10.3. This Policy is published on the official website of the journal in Ukrainian and English and is accessible to all readers and participants in the publication process.