Ethics and publishing policy

The editorial board of the journal Modern Construction and Architecture strictly adheres to the guidelines and best practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All parties involved in the publication process – authors, editors, and reviewers – are expected to comply with these ethical standards.

The journal’s policy is dedicated to preventing unethical practices, including plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data falsification, fabrication, and improper authorship, in accordance with international scientific standards and Ukraine legislation.

Principles of Ethical Policy
 - Integrity and Transparency. The editorial board ensures the objectivity and transparency of the review and publication process through systematic compliance checks.
 - Regulatory Compliance. The policy aligns with Ukrainian law on academic integrity and the recommendations of leading international organisations (specifically COPE).
 - Zero Tolerance for Misconduct. The journal does not tolerate any form of academic dishonesty. Clear mechanisms are in place to respond to identified violations as per COPE flowcharts and the Ministry of Education and Science regulations.

Ethical Responsibilities of the Editorial Board

The Editor-in-Chief holds final responsibility for deciding which submitted manuscripts will be published. The decisions are guided by the journal’s policy and legal requirements regarding copyright, defamation, and plagiarism.

Manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scientific merit, regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

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

Authors’ Responsibilities

Authors guarantee that their work is original and that all data presented is accurate. Listening persons who did not significantly contribute as co-authors (gift authorship) is prohibited.

Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal is considered unethical. This includes submitting previously published work (e.g., a translation of an article already published in another language).

Authors must disclose any financial or personal conflicts of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their research. All potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed prior to submission of the manuscript. In doing so, the editorial board ensures the objective and fair evaluation of submitted manuscripts and prevents the emergence of actual or potential conflicts of interest between authors, the editorial board, and reviewers.

Authors must present the results of their own research clearly and ensure an objective discussion of their findings. The data and methods used in the research must be presented in detail and in a form suitable for analysis.

All quoted materials and ideas must be properly cited. If an article includes copyrighted images or data, authors must obtain written permission from the copyright holder.

If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they must immediately notify the Editorial Board to facilitate the necessary corrections or a retraction. If the editorial board learns from a third party that a published article contains a significant error, the authors are required, upon request, to promptly correct the manuscript or provide evidence proving the accuracy of the original findings.

Plagiarism and Data Integrity
Plagiarism, data fabrication, and image manipulation are strictly prohibited. 
- Plagiarism includes copying or paraphrasing another person’s text, ideas, images, or images without proper attribution, as well as claiming research results conducted by others as one’s own.
- Any form of plagiarism is considered grave unethical behaviour.
- If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript will be rejected.
- If plagiarism is identified after publication, the Editorial Board reserves the right to publish a formal correction or retract the article (with a public notice on the journal’s website).
The authors bear full responsibility for copyright infringements and any failure to comply with established academic standards.

Duties of Reviewers

To ensure an objectivity assessment of manuscript quality, the Editorial Board adheres to a double-anonymised peer review process.

If a selected reviewer feels that their qualifications do not match the specific research field or if they cannot complete the review in a timely manner, they must inform the editor and decline the invitation.

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as strictly confidential. They must not be shared, shown, or discussed with third parties unless specifically authorised by the Editor-in-Chief.

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is considered unprofessional. Reviewers must express their view clearly, providing supporting arguments that are understandable to both the author and the editor. 

If a reviewer identifies that a manuscript contains previously published data, conclusions, arguments, or images without proper citation, they must provide the relevant reference. Any significant similarity between the submitted manuscript and another published work must be reported to the editor immediately.

Reviewers are prohibited from using or disclosing any unpublished information, arguments or conclusions from the manuscript for their own personal or research gain.

Reviewers must submit their feedback within the deadlines established by the editorial board to ensure the efficiency of the publication process.

The journal Modern Construction and Architecture strictly adheres to the ethical standards and best practices defined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), namely:
 - Transparency: Ensuring clarity in the processes of submission, peer review, and publication;
 - Independence: Guaranteeing the impartiality and independence of editors and reviewers;
 - Academic integrity: maintaining a zero-tolerance policy towards plagiarism, falsification, and redundant (double) publication;
 - Authorship Integrity: Clearly defining the contributions of each author;
 - Accountability: Providing open procedures for reviewing appeals, complaints, and ethical disputes;
 - Retractions and Corrections: Maintaining transparent protocols for retracting articles, issuing corrections, and reporting errors.

The editorial stuff applies the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) principles within a broader scientific context to ensure:
 - Editorial Independence: Decisions are made based on scientific merit, free from pressure from management, sponsors, or commercial interests;
 - Conflicts of Interest: Mandatory declaration of potential conflicts by authors, reviewers, and editors;
 - Quality Review: Ensuring an objective, fair, and timely expert evaluation of all submissions;
 - Funding Transparency: Full disclosure of grants, sponsors, and research funding sources;
 - Support for Early-Career Researchers: Active promoting and supporting publications by young scientist at the stage of their professional jouney.

The journal supports the DORA (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment )principles for the fair assessment of scientific activity:
 - Research is evaluated based on its intrinsic quality, novelty, and contribution to science rather than purely bibliometrics indicators; 
 - Recognising the value of various research results, including software, datasets, algorithms, and technical solutions, alongside traditional articles;
 - Treating interdisciplinary research as equivalent to classical disciplinary publications; 
 - Encouraging the publication of preprints and providing open access to research data and code.

The journal also incorporates the following frameworks into its editorial policy:

Open Access: Committed to the immediate and unrestricted sharing of scientific results.

FAIR Data Principles: Ensuring that research data is Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable.

Plan S Compliance: Supporting the transition to full and immediate open access to scientific publications and archives.

AI ethics: Maintaining strict transparency and accountability regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence in the research and writing process. 

Policy on the use of artificial intelligence and technologies supported by artificial intelligence

 This policy defines the permissible use of AI-enabled tools:

Permissible Use: AI may be used to improve text quality, editing, or translation.

Authors Obligations:
 - Author must ensure a thorough manual review of AI-generated content to prevent the inclusion of inaccurate or biased information;
 - Author must explicitly disclose the use of AI tools, specifying the tool name, the purpose of its use, and the sections where it was applied.

Restrictions:
 - Editors and Reviewers are strictly prohibited from using AI to make editorial decision, perform critical evaluations, or form substantive opinions on manuscripts.
 - The editorial board reserves the right to use automated detection tools and experts assessment to identify undisclosed generative AI usage.

Note: The policy does not apply to basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, or references. Authors remain fully responsible for the entire content of their manuscript.

Procedure for Retraction of Published Articles

The journal follows the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines regarding the retraction of published content.

This procedure establishes the process for retracting articles published in the Collection of scientific works “Modern Construction and Architecture”. The purpose of retraction is to correct published information and ensure the integrity of scientific publications. Retraction of a published article may be initiated by authors, the editorial board, readers or authorized persons. In cases where there is the information about violations of publication rules, the Editorial Board acts in accordance with the relevant recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Grounds for Retraction:
 - confirmed plagiarism or improper data usage;
 - significant errors that render the research results invalid;
 - Redundant publication (duplication) without proper citation;
 - data falsification or fabrication;
 - undisclosed major conflicts of interest;
 - ethical violations during the research process.

The Process:
 - A person initiating the retraction of a published article must submit a written request in paper or electronic form, providing justification for the retraction. Supporting evidence confirming the need for retraction must be attached to the request. The request is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief within 10 working days. The Editor-in-Chief establishes a committee consisting of three members of the editorial board to analyze the information provided in the request. The authors of the article are given the opportunity to provide their explanations. The review period by the Committee shall not exceed 30 calendar days.
 - Based on the results of the review, the Committee may reject the retraction request, propose that the authors make the corrections with mandatory indication of such changes, or recommend full retraction of the article.
 - Retracted articles are clearly labeled as “RETRACTED” in the electronic version. A retraction notice is published in the next issue and linked to the original article. The article remains in the archive to maintain the scientific record but is marked accordingly.
 - Authors have the right to receive a copy of the Сommittee’s decision, to appeal against the decision, and to publish a comment regarding the retraction in the corresponding notice on the collection’s website. In case of an appeal, it is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief within 20 calendar days.

Procedure for Reviewing Complaints Regarding Ethical Violations

 1. This procedure establishes the framework for handling complaints regarding ethical violations by authors, reviewers, or editorial board members of the journal. It covers issues related to plagiarism, data manipulation, unauthorized data usage, conflict of interest, and other breaches of academic integrity.

 2. Filing a Complaint. Complaints must be submitted electronically to: visnuk_odaba@odaba.edu.ua . The complaint must include the applicant's contact details, a link to the manuscript or material in question, and a detailed description of the violation supported by relevant evidence and justification. Anonymous complaints will not be considered.

 3. Review Process. Within 10 working days of receiving a complaint, the Editor-in-Chief establishes a committee of three independent experts to investigate. If the complaint involves a member of the editorial board, that individual is excluded from the committee. The commission may consult external experts, request additional documentation, and hold discussions with all parties involved. The review process shall not exceed 30 calendar days. Confidentiality is strictly maintained for all participants throughout the process.

 4. Decisions and Actions. Based on the investigation, the committee may:
  - Dismiss the complaint as unsubstantiated;
  - Acknowledge a minor violation and propose a corrective solution;
  - Recognize a serious violation and implement appropriate measures, such as refusing publication, retracting a published article, imposing a temporary ban on future submissions from the authors, or proposing changes to the editorial board membership.

 5. All the parties involved have the right to stay informed about the review progress, provide explanations and evidence, and appeal the committee's decision.

 6. The committee’s decision may be appealed within 15 calendar days. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief within 20 calendar days. The decision of the Editor-in-Chief within 20 calendar days. The decision of the Editor-in-Chief is final.