Ethical Research Involving Humans

The ethical policy of “The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series: International Relations. Economics. Country Studies. Tourism” regarding research involving human participants is based on the international standards of academic integrity and COPE recommendations. The journal considers only those manuscripts that comply with ethical protocols aimed at protecting the rights, safety, and dignity of the research participants.

General Principles

Authors submitting manuscripts based on research involving human participants are required to ensure that such studies comply with the national legislation, ethical standards, and international bioethics conventions. All procedures must be transparent, justified, and must not harm the participants.

Ethical Approval 

• All studies involving humans must be pre-approved by the appropriate institutional ethics committee or its equivalent. 
• Authors must provide the editorial office with a clear reference to the ethical approval, including the approval number, date, and name of the issuing authority. 
• Studies that do not require ethical approval under national legislation must be accompanied by appropriate justification from the authors.

Informed Consent

• The authors must confirm that voluntary informed consent was obtained from all study participants.
• In cases where participants are unable to provide consent themselves (e.g., minors or individuals with limited decision-making capacity), consent from their legal representatives is required.
• Manuscripts must include a description of the consent procedures.

Confidentiality and Anonymity 

• All participants’ personal data were anonymized or presented in a depersonalized form. 
• The authors are responsible for complying with legislation regarding personal data protection and confidentiality.

Vulnerable groups

Research involving vulnerable groups (minors, elderly people, persons with disabilities, and individuals in difficult life circumstances) must comply with heightened standards of ethical oversight and safety.

Risks and Safety

Authors must describe the potential risks to participants and the measures taken to minimize them. Studies that create unjustified risks are not eligible for publication.

Procedure for handling complaints regarding publication ethics misconduct

The procedure for handling complaints by the editorial board of the academic journal «Social Economics» is based on the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding the handling of reports of potential misconduct.

1. Grounds for Filing a Complaint

A complaint or allegation of misconduct may be submitted if there are reasonable suspicions regarding:

• Data Manipulation: Fabrication, falsification, or improper alteration of research findings.
• Plagiarism: Misappropriation of ideas, text, or results of others without proper attribution.
• Authorship Issues: Inclusion of "gift" authors, exclusion of contributors, or submission without co-authors' consent.
• Conflict of Interest: Failure to disclose financial or personal ties that could influence objectivity.
• Peer Review Manipulation: Compromising the review process, reviewer bias, or theft of ideas during the evaluation.
• Ethical Violations: Lack of ethics committee approval for research involving human or animal subjects.

Step 1: Registration and Initial Assessment. The editorial office acknowledges receipt of the complaint. The Editor-in-Chief assesses whether the allegation contains sufficient evidence to warrant an investigation. Anonymous complaints are considered if they provide specific facts.

Step 2: Communication with Authors. The editor contacts the authors with an official inquiry for clarification, maintaining a presumption of integrity until the investigation is concluded.

Step 3: Analysis of Arguments. If the authors' response is unsatisfactory or indicates misconduct, the editorial board involves an internal committee or independent experts for detailed analysis.

Step 4: Institutional Referral. In cases of suspected serious misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) that the journal cannot verify independently, the editor contacts the author’s institution to request a formal investigation.

Step 5: Decision-Making. Based on the gathered evidence or institutional findings, the editor decides on the outcome: dismissal of the complaint, publication of a Correction, an Expression of Concern, or a Retraction.

Step 6: Informing the Parties. The editorial office notifies the complainant and the authors of the outcome. All records related to the case are maintained in the journal’s confidential archives.

Guidelines for the retraction of published articles

The scientific journal «Social Economics» adheres to COPE guidelines for retractions.

1. Purpose of Retraction Retraction is a mechanism for correcting the literature and ensuring its integrity, not for punishing authors. Articles are retracted if they contain seriously flawed or erroneous content or data, meaning their findings and conclusions can no longer be relied upon.
2. Grounds for Retraction

Editors may decide to retract a publication in the following instances:

• Unreliable Data: Clear evidence of major errors, data or image manipulation, or unintentional miscalculations that compromise the findings.
• Plagiarism and Redundancy: Identification of an unacceptable level of overlap with previously published content or findings published elsewhere without proper attribution or justification.
• Ethical Misconduct: Reports of unethical research practices or failure to disclose a major conflict of interest that could unduly affect interpretations.
• Compromised Process: Evidence of compromised peer review (e.g., fake reviewers) or systematic manipulation of the publication process (e.g., paper mills).
• Authorship and Legal Issues: Unverifiable or fictitious authorship, undisclosed involvement of AI, or serious legal issues such as copyright infringement or libel.

Guidelines for the retraction of published articles

The scientific journal «Social Economics» adheres to COPE guidelines for retractions.

1. Purpose of Retraction Retraction is a mechanism for correcting the literature and ensuring its integrity, not for punishing authors. Articles are retracted if they contain seriously flawed or erroneous content or data, meaning their findings and conclusions can no longer be relied upon.
2. Grounds for Retraction

Editors may decide to retract a publication in the following instances:

• Unreliable Data: Clear evidence of major errors, data or image manipulation, or unintentional miscalculations that compromise the findings.
• Plagiarism and Redundancy: Identification of an unacceptable level of overlap with previously published content or findings published elsewhere without proper attribution or justification.
• Ethical Misconduct: Reports of unethical research practices or failure to disclose a major conflict of interest that could unduly affect interpretations.
• Compromised Process: Evidence of compromised peer review (e.g., fake reviewers) or systematic manipulation of the publication process (e.g., paper mills).
• Authorship and Legal Issues: Unverifiable or fictitious authorship, undisclosed involvement of AI, or serious legal issues such as copyright infringement or libel.

1. Retraction Procedure Stages
2. Initiation:A retraction request can be made by authors, institutions, readers, or the editor.
3. Investigation:The editorial board investigates the concerns. If the investigation is delayed, an "Expression of Concern" may be issued.
4. Decision-Making:The final decision rests with the editor. Retraction may proceed even if some or all authors do not agree.
5. Author Notification:The editor notifies the authors regarding the reasons for the loss of confidence and why the issue cannot be resolved by a correction.
6. Publication of Notice:
   1. The notice must be published as soon as possible and remain freely accessible to all readers.
   2. It must identify the article (title/authors) and state who is retracting the article and the reasons why.
   3. The notice must be linked to the retracted article in all journal versions.
7. Article Identification:All versions of the original article (PDF and HTML) should be watermarked as "RETRACTED". The original work is retained online to ensure the transparency of the scientific record.

Ethics Violations 

If any breaches of the publication’s ethical standards are identified, actions will be taken in accordance with the COPE recommendations. This may include rejecting the manuscript, publishing a correction, or retracting an already-published article.

Relationships between authors, editors and reviewers in our journal are based on academic benevolence, objectivity of ratings and priority of scientific quality. We are following the principles of Code of Conduct for Editors as defined by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE).