Procedure for Considering Complaints about Ethical Violations
1. Purpose and scope
This procedure defines how the journal “Physical and Mathematical Education” handles complaints regarding potential breaches of publication ethics and academic integrity by authors, reviewers, editorial board members, or other participants in the editorial process.
It applies, in particular, to allegations of plagiarism/unauthorised use, data fabrication or falsification, copyright infringement, conflicts of interest, manipulation of peer review, improper authorship, and other forms of publication misconduct. The journal follows relevant COPE guidance when handling complaints.
2. Submitting a complaint
2.1. Complaints must be submitted by email to the journal’s official address: fmo-journal@fizmatsspu.sumy.ua.
2.2. A complaint should include:
- complainant’s name and contact details (and affiliation, if applicable);
- a link to the publication/manuscript or a clear description of the material concerned;
- a detailed description of the alleged misconduct with supporting evidence where available (files/screenshots/links).
2.3. Anonymous complaints are not considered. However, the journal may keep the complainant’s identity confidential and will not disclose it to other parties unless required for due process or by law.
3. Initial assessment
3.1. The Editor-in-Chief (or an authorised editor) registers the complaint and appoints a person responsible for the initial assessment.
3.2. Within 5 business days, the journal assesses:
- whether the complaint falls within the journal’s remit;
- whether sufficient information is provided to proceed.
3.3. The complainant is informed whether the complaint has been registered and whether it is being taken forward, with a brief explanation.
4. Investigation and review
4.1. A panel of three members (editors and/or external experts) is appointed to review the case. Panel members must have no conflict of interest. Individuals directly concerned by the complaint cannot take part in the review.
4.2. The panel may:
- request additional information and explanations from relevant parties;
- consult independent external experts;
- conduct consultations necessary to clarify the facts.
4.3. The review is completed within 30 calendar days from registration. For complex cases, the period may be extended by up to 15 calendar days, and the complainant will be informed of the reasons.
5. Outcomes and measures
5.1. The panel may decide to:
- dismiss the complaint as unfounded;
- identify a minor issue and recommend corrective action (e.g., correction/clarification/erratum);
- confirm serious misconduct and apply appropriate measures.
5.2. Measures for serious misconduct may include:
- rejection of the manuscript;
- publication of a correction or an expression of concern where appropriate;
- retraction of a published article in line with the journal’s retraction policy;
- temporary restrictions on new submissions for a defined period;
- notification of the author’s institution, where justified and subject to confidentiality and legal requirements.
6. Due process and confidentiality
6.1. All parties have the right to:
- be informed that a review is underway (within confidentiality limits);
- submit explanations and evidence;
- be informed of the outcome.
6.2. The journal maintains confidentiality of the case materials and personal data in accordance with applicable law and what is necessary for a fair review.
7. Appeal
7.1. A panel decision may be appealed within 14 calendar days by submitting an appeal to the journal’s official email.
7.2. The appeal is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief with input from (or based on the opinion of) an editor/editorial board member who did not participate in the original review, within 10 business days.
7.3. Following the appeal, the decision may be upheld or a re-review may be initiated (including appointment of an additional independent expert). The appeal decision is final.
