Editorial Policy

Publication Ethics and Quality Standards
The Editorial Board follows the principles and best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ensuring transparency, academic integrity, and equal treatment of all authors regardless of their institutional or geographical affiliation. The journal is committed to maintaining high publication standards and promoting the dissemination of credible and ethically sound scientific knowledge.

Open access policy

The journal provides open access to all published materials, allowing readers to freely read, download, copy, distribute, and use publications for scholarly purposes.
All journal materials are protected by copyright and are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license, unless otherwise stated.
Use of journal materials is permitted provided that:
proper citation and reference to the source are included;
the integrity of the text and content of the article is maintained;
Authors retain the right to reuse their work in their own publications, presentations, teaching materials, and other academic projects, provided that the license terms are followed.
Journal materials may be used by educators, students, and researchers for teaching, research, and preparation of scholarly works.
Any commercial use of materials requires written permission from the authors and the journal editorial board.
The journal is not responsible for unauthorized use by third parties but reserves the right to take action in cases of copyright infringement.

Peer Review Procedure

The journal employs a single-blind peer review procedure, which ensures the anonymity of reviewers. The primary expert review is conducted by the editor-in-chief of the journal.

Preliminary review. The Editor-in-Chief checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal and is original, has not been submitted anywhere else and does not contain plagiarism in all its forms. Otherwise the manuscript may be rejected on this step. After an initial technical screening and verification of compliance with journal requirements, the manuscript is assigned to two independent reviewers with relevant academic qualifications and expertise in the subject area.

Peer review. The reviewers provide evaluation of the manusrip addressing:

relevance of the article
novelty and originality of the received results
connection with existing research and concepts
conformity of the research methodology with the obtained results
connection of conclusions with the results of research
structure, logical consistency and correct presentation of the material
manuscript quality.

Reviewers provide a written report with one of the following recommendations:

- accept for publication without changes;

- accept after minor revision;

- revise and resubmit for further review;

- reject the manuscript.
Reviewers must decline to assess any manuscript in case of a potential conflict of interest with the authors or the research content.

The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or to reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually noted as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

Editor's decision. After reviewing the manuscript may be:

- accepted for publication;

- returned to the author to make the appropriate adjustments;

- rejected as not corresponding to the current requirements to professional editorials.

The final decision is made by the Editor-in Chief.

The executive editor sends a final decision email to the corresponding author including the review form with reviewer's comments, maintaining anonymity of the reviewers.

If accepted, the manuscript is sent to publication in the Current Issue of the journal.

In cases of significant disagreement between reviewers reports, the Editorial Board may appoint an additional reviewer.

Revised manuscripts may undergo a repeated round of review.

All submitted manuscripts are treated as strictly confidential documents. Reviewers are prohibited from disclosing, discussing, or using any data, arguments, or findings from the reviewed papers prior to their official publication.

Retraction Policy

A published article may be retracted in cases of:
plagiarism or self-plagiarism;
data fabrication or falsification;
significant methodological errors affecting the validity of the results;
duplicate publication without proper notification;
infringement of copyright or failure to disclose a conflict of interest;
other serious violations of academic integrity.
Allegations of ethical violations are submitted to the Editor-in-Chief.
The Editorial Board conducts a thorough investigation, involving external experts and the article’s authors if necessary.
Based on the investigation, the Edtorial Board prepares a written report with recommendations, which may include:
correction of the article;
retraction of the article;
publication of an official statement regarding the ethical violation.
The Editor-in-Chief approves the final decision on retraction.
Retracted articles remain in the journal’s archive with the label “Retracted”, and an official notice explaining the reasons and date of retraction is published on the journal’s website.
Authors may appeal the retraction decision by applying to the Editor-in-Chief. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with an independent external expert.

Plagiarism Policy

All submissions are checked for plagiarism before peer review.
Plagiarism and self-plagiarism are considered serious breaches of academic integrity. In case of detection:
during peer review, the manuscript is rejected;
after publication, the article is subject to retraction.

Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Authors are required to:
disclose any use of AI in methodology or text;
ensure accuracy, reliability, and scholarly responsibility for all results, even if AI-assisted.
Misuse of AI that results in data falsification, misrepresentation, or unethical attribution is considered a violation of academic integrity and may lead to:
rejection of the manuscript;
retraction of the published article.

Complaints treatment

A complaint must be submitted in written form via the official email address of the journal and must include:

the full name of the complainant (or the name of the representing institution);

a clear description of the alleged violation and justification;

any available evidence or documents supporting the complaint.

Anonymous complaints will be considered only if sufficient evidence or factual basis is provided.

Upon receipt of a complaint, the Editor-in-Chief confirms its acceptance and forwards it to the Ethics Committee, composed of members of the Editorial Board who have no conflict of interest with the complainant or the parties involved.

The Editorial Board reviews the materials, external experts may be invited, or additional explanations may be requested from the involved parties.

Based on the review results, the Editorial Board prepares a formal report with recommendations for further action, which is approved by the Editor-in-Chief.
Depending on the established facts, the Editorial Board may adopt one or more of the following decisions:
issue a warning to the author, reviewer, or editorial member;
request a correction or retraction of the publication;
notify relevant academic or institutional authorities of the violation.
All complaints are treated confidentially, information about the individuals involved in the process is not disclosed without their consent.
Complainant may file an appeal in case of disagreement with the decision. The appeal is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief in collaboration with an independent external expert.