Scientia et Societus

All participants – authors, reviewers, and editors – are required to openly declare any potential conflict of interest. This helps prevent them from influencing scientific results and the decision-making process regarding publications.

Conflict of interest from authors

Authors must disclose any conflict of interest when submitting a manuscript. This may relate to financial aspects (fees, business involvement, patents) as well as non-financial factors (personal relationships, academic rivalry, ideological or religious beliefs). All conflict of interest must be clearly stated so that readers can assess whether they may have affected the authors' impartiality. A "Conflict of Interest" note will be published at the end of the article, and if none exists, "None" will be stated.

Conflict of interest from reviewers

Reviewers must also disclose any conflict of interest that could affect their objectivity when evaluating the article. They must inform the editorial team if:

• There are financial or personal connections with the authors or organisations involved in the research.
• Their own research directly competes with the manuscript they are reviewing.
• There are personal interests or biases (friendship, rivalry, etc.) that may influence the objectivity of their evaluation.

If a conflict of interest exists, reviewers are required to decline to review the manuscript.

Conflict of interest from editors

Editors must also declare conflict of interest that may affect their ability to make impartial decisions regarding the articles. They are required to recuse themselves from reviewing articles in the following cases:

• If they have financial, personal, or academic connections with the author(s) or organisation(s) that could lead to a conflict of interest.
• If they are co-authors of the article or work at the same institution as the author(s).
• If their involvement may be perceived as biased.

In such cases, the editor must transfer the manuscript to another editor or involve an independent expert.

The journal guarantees transparency in disclosing conflict of interest, and this information will be included at the end of each article. All participants in the publication process (authors, reviewers, editors) are required to adhere to this policy to ensure the integrity of scientific communication.

Handling complaints and ethical issues

The editorial team is committed to responding promptly and constructively to all complaints. Each complaint will be considered according to its nature and complexity, and the editorial decision will be based on recommendations from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Suggestions or complaints should be sent to the official email address of the journal: mail@sets.com.ua. All messages will be reviewed within 30 working days. However, for more complex complaints, the investigation may take longer.

A complaint must be specific, clear, and contain sufficient information to demonstrate a violation of publication ethics. If possible, additional documents supporting the claim should also be provided.

Complaints that fall outside the journal's responsibility (such as personal grievances against authors, editors, or reviewers) will be answered with an explanation of why the complaint is outside the journal's scope. The journal will not consider complaints submitted in an offensive or threatening manner.

Appealing editorial decisions

"Scietia et Socientus" acknowledges the right of authors to appeal editorial decisions and aims to provide a transparent, unbiased process for reviewing scientific materials.

Subjects for appeal may include:

• Rejection of publication.
• A request for substantial revision of a manuscript that the author believes is unjustified.
• Suspicions of bias in the review process.
• Other actions by the editorial team that the author believes contradict academic ethics.

Appeal submission procedure

Appeals should be submitted in writing to the official email address of the editorial team: mail@sets.com.ua within 30 calendar days from the receipt of the editorial decision.

The appeal must include:

• The title of the manuscript.
• A clear and reasoned explanation of the grounds for the appeal.
• Any additional materials or documents supporting the author's position (if available).

Appeal review

The appeal will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or another member of the Editorial Board who was not involved in the initial decision. If necessary, a re-review will be initiated with the involvement of an independent expert. The appeal will be considered within 30 calendar days. After the review, the author will receive a written response with the final decision from the editorial team.

Finality of the decision

The decision made after the appeal review is final and is not subject to further appeal.