COMPLAINTS POLICY

The Editorial Board of the scientific journal “Acta Academiae Beregsasiensis. Economics” recognizes the importance of maintaining high standards of academic integrity and adhering to ethical principles at all stages of the publication process. In the event of concerns or complaints relating to possible violations of ethical standards, the Editorial Board provides a transparent, objective, and impartial mechanism for their consideration in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Types of Complaints Considered

The Editorial Board considers complaints relating to:

• disputes concerning the authorship of a publication;
• plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or unauthorized use of others’ results;
• duplicate or simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals;
• falsification or fabrication of data;
• violations of research standards or ethical principles relating to studies involving humans or animals;
• undisclosed conflicts of interest;
• bias or misconduct on the part of reviewers or editors;
• irregularities in the publication administration process, or proposals for improving editorial policy.

2. Principles Governing the Complaints Process

In considering complaints, the Editorial Board is guided by the following principles:

• all parties have an equal right to be heard;
• information about the complaint is not disclosed to third parties without the consent of the parties;
• every complaint is considered within reasonable and predetermined timeframes;
• decisions are made solely based on verified facts and documents;
• all stages of the procedure are aligned with COPE’s international recommendations.

3. Who May Submit a Complaint

Any participant in the publication process or any third party who has reasonable grounds to believe that a violation of ethical standards has occurred may submit a complaint, including an author, reviewer, reader, member of the Editorial Board, or representative of a research institution.

Anonymous complaints are considered only in exceptional cases where they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information to enable investigation.

4. How to Submit a Complaint

Complaints should be sent to the journal’s official email address:

The complaint must include:

• a clear description of the alleged violation and the circumstances in which it occurred;
• a reference to the specific publication concerned (title, authors, year, DOI);
• the identity of the person whose conduct is the subject of the complaint (where evidence is available);
• supporting materials (where applicable): screenshots, documents, links, etc.

5. Complaints Procedure

The Editorial Board considers complaints in accordance with COPE recommendations, adhering to the principles of impartiality, confidentiality, and evidence-based decision-making.

1. Initial assessment: The Editor-in-Chief reviews the validity of the complaint and assesses whether there are sufficient grounds to proceed. If the complaint concerns the conduct of the Editor-in-Chief, it is referred to the Editorial Board.
2. Investigation: The Editorial Board examines the relevant materials, correspondence history, and explanations provided by the parties involved. Independent experts may be consulted if necessary.
3. Communication with the parties: The Editorial Board informs the parties of the complaint’s progress and provides them with the opportunity to submit their comments or evidence.
4. Decision: Following review of all materials, the Editorial Board issues a decision, which may include:
   • dismissal of the complaint as unsubstantiated;
   • publication of a correction or an editorial note;
   • retraction of the article if serious violations are confirmed;
   • notification of the research institution or organization where the study was conducted.

6. Timeframes

If the matter requires detailed analysis or additional explanations from the parties involved, this period may be extended. In such cases, the Editorial Board will provide the reason for the delay and the expected completion date.

7. Appeals

If the complainant considers the Editorial Board’s decision to be unsubstantiated or that the procedure was not followed correctly, they have the right to appeal within 14 calendar days of receiving the decision.

The appeal is considered by the full Editorial Board (excluding any persons involved in the initial review). The decision on appeal is final.

8. External Escalation

If the complainant remains dissatisfied following the completion of the internal procedure (including the appeals stage), they may refer the matter to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The journal is guided by COPE’s recommendations and guidelines in all aspects of editorial ethics and the complaints procedure.

Members of the journal’s Editorial Board are members of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), which provides an additional guarantee of adherence to international standards of editorial practice.