Policy of publication ethics and malpractice statement

1. General Principles

The journal "Professional Pedagogics" is committed to the highest standards of publication ethics and adheres to the COPE Core Practices developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics. The Editorial Board ensures transparency, integrity, and accountability throughout every stage of the editorial and publishing process.

2. Duties of the Editorial Board and Editors

  • Impartiality: Decisions to accept or reject a manuscript are based solely on its scientific merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

  • Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher.

  • Conflict Resolution: The Editorial Board follows COPE Flowcharts when investigating suspected cases of plagiarism, data fabrication, or other research misconduct.

  • Legal Compliance: The Editorial Board operates in accordance with the legislation of Ukraine (regarding intellectual property and state language) and complies with GDPR regulations concerning the protection of personal data.

3. Duties of Reviewers

  • Objectivity: Peer review is conducted via a double-blind peer review process. Reviews must be objective, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments.

  • Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must notify the Editorial Board of any competing interests that could bias their evaluation and should decline to review specific manuscripts if necessary.

  • Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review are treated as privileged communications and must not be discussed with third parties.

  • AI Ethics: Reviewers are strictly prohibited from using generative AI tools to analyze manuscripts or generate peer-review reports to preserve the confidentiality and intellectual integrity of the process.

4. Duties of Authors and Authorship Criteria

  • Originality: Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original, has not been published elsewhere, and is not currently under consideration by another journal.

  • Authorship Criteria: Authorship is limited to those who have made a significant intellectual contribution to the study. Funding, data collection, or general supervision do not, by themselves, justify authorship.

  • Use of Generative AI: Authors are required to disclose the use of generative AI in the preparation of their manuscript in accordance with the journal's AI Disclosure Policy.

  • Accountability: All co-authors are collectively responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the reported data.

5. Conflict of Interest Policy

All participants in the publication process (authors, editors, and reviewers) must disclose potential conflicts of interest:

  • Personal: Relationships or personal beliefs (political, religious, ideological).

  • Professional: Recent collaborations, rivalries, or membership in lobbying organizations.

  • Financial: Research grants, patents, or honoraria from stakeholders.

6. Correction and Retraction Procedures

In accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines, the journal publishes:

  • Retractions: When findings are found to be unreliable due to serious errors, plagiarism, or data manipulation.

  • Corrections: To address technical errors or minor omissions that do not invalidate the study's conclusions.

  • Expressions of Concern: While an investigation into serious ethical suspicions is ongoing.

7. Anti-Plagiarism and Misconduct Prevention

  • Plagiarism Screening: All submissions undergo mandatory screening for plagiarism. The originality threshold for the author's text must be at least 85%.

  • Data Falsification: Using AI to generate fictitious data, results, or graphs is a grave violation of ethics and will lead to immediate manuscript rejection.