Procedure for requests

General Principles

The editorial board of “Agora. Social Sciences Journal” recognizes the importance of prompt and objective responses to communications concerning the following:

  • suspected violations of academic integrity (plagiarism, data fabrication, improper authorship, etc.),
  • ethical issues related to publication,
  • the peer review process,
  • conflicts of interest,
  • unethical behavior by authors, reviewers, or editors.

The editorial board adheres to a transparent and impartial approach guided by COPE principles and recognized scholarly best practices.

Initiating an appeal

An appeal may be submitted by

  • the author(s),
  • the reviewer,
  • the reader,
  • any other interested members of the scientific community.

Any appeals to the editorial office are accepted in written form, with a detailed description of the situation, evidence, and contact information for feedback, by sending a letter of appeal to the official address of the publisher. Please note the requirements for appeals, which are regulated by Article 5 of the Law of Ukraine “On Citizens' Appeals”.

Stages of consideration of the appeal

Preliminary Assessment

  • The editor-in-chief or an authorized member of the editorial board registers the complaint and conducts an initial analysis of its validity.
  • If the complaint is general or not supported by facts, the author is informed that there are no grounds for further consideration.

Formal Investigation

If the complaint shows signs of a possible violation:

  • An internal committee (editorial or independent) is formed to review the case.
  • Official explanations are requested from the parties involved (authors, reviewers, others);
  • If necessary, independent experts are consulted or cooperation with the authors' institution is initiated.
  • The review was carried out in accordance with COPE Flowcharts, adhering to the principles of fairness, confidentiality, and the presumption of integrity.

Decision

Based on the information collected, one of the following decisions is made:

  • No violations found: The complaint is closed with a response to the applicant.
  • Correction: Publication of a corrigendum or erratum.
  • Article retraction – with the publication of an official notice
  • Rejection of publication (if the complaint concerns a work that has not yet been published)
  • Notification of the affiliated institution (in the case of a serious ethical violation).

Results Notification

  • All parties involved in the case were informed of the outcome of the review.
  • If the violation concerns an already published article, relevant information is made publicly available (in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines).
  • If the review takes a long time, the claimant receives interim updates regarding the status of the investigation.

Principles of Transparency

The Editorial Board guarantees the following:

  • Confidentiality of all participants involved in the review process;
  • Impartiality and equality of all parties;
  • No discrimination against individuals who submit substantiated appeals;
  • Openness to appeals: If a party disagrees with a decision, they may resubmit with additional arguments or file a complaint with the ethics committee of the affiliated institution.

Warning of violations

The journal uses:

  • Plagiarism checking (with StrikePlagiarism software)
  • Ethics check at the submission stage
  • Clear editorial policies are available on the publication's website.
  • Signing of an author declaration (if necessary).