The policy of "Sociology of Law" adheres to the practice of copyright protection and ethical principles supported by the community of leading academic publishers Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and DORA. 

 

ETHICAL REVIEWS OF THE REVIEWERS

If the reviewer is not sure that his / her qualification is relevant to the level and direction of the research presented in the article, he / she is obliged to refuse the review.

The contents of the manuscript are confidential. The reviewer is forbidden to disclose information from the article or discuss the author's unpublished findings and recommendations with other colleagues (except when the reviewer requires someone's special advice, which requires the permission of the editorial board).

A reviewer should not evaluate a manuscript with which the author or co-author has personal or professional connections, if such relationships may affect the manuscript's judgment.

Reviewers need to adequately explain and reason their opinions so that authors and editors can understand what their comments are based on.

The seriousness of the accusation of plagiarism requires the reviewer to adequately and reasonably justify his or her own comments. Any allegation of plagiarism or biased citation should be accompanied by a citation (the reviewer's findings should not be defamatory or defamatory to the author without serious grounds for doing so);

The reviewer should note any instances of insufficient citation by the authors of the work of other scholars directly related to the peer-reviewed work; he should also draw the editor's attention to any significant similarity between the manuscript submitted and any published article.

The reviewer may not use the materials of unpublished manuscripts in his own research without the written consent of the author. The reviewer is obliged to refuse to review the manuscript due to which he or she has a conflict of interest because of a competitive, collaborative or other relationship with the author or the organization related to the manuscript.

Working in a scholarly publication requires a peer reviewer of a high degree of discipline, which is to provide a timely review of the article and to respect the authors of the article.

 

ETHICAL OBLIGATIONS OF THE EDITORIAL COLLEGE

The Editorial Board of the "Sociology of law" is responsible for deciding what articles should be published. Submitted manuscripts should be checked for the relevance of the topic and its relevance for researchers and readers. The editor-in-chief may be guided by the policy of the editorial board of the journal, and his decision must be based on the provisions of law prohibiting copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor-in-chief may consult with other members of the editorial board to make a decision.

The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject the article or return it for further revision. In this case, the author is obliged to revise the article in accordance with the comments of the reviewers or editorial board.

The editorial board may reject the manuscript without peer review if it believes that the material does not fit the publication's profile.

The editorial board should consider all the manuscripts submitted to the editorial office without prejudice, evaluate them qualitatively, regardless of racial, religious, national origin, as well as the place of work / study of the author (authors). The editorial board must make fair and impartial decisions about the scientific quality of the manuscripts, independent of commercial or other interests, and ensure an objective review process.

The editorial board has the right to remove even published material in the event of a violation of one's rights or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics (if legally proven). The editorial board shall notify the author who submitted the materials and the organization where the study was carried out of the fact of removal of the materials.

The Editorial Board is under no obligation to disclose information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, the reviewer (with one-sided blind review), and, if necessary, the publisher.

When submitting an ethical complaint about a submitted manuscript or a published article, the editor-in-chief and the editorial board must take the appropriate objective measures. Such measures usually involve contacting the author of the manuscript or article and proper consideration of the complaint or claim, but may also need to be addressed to the appropriate agencies and research organizations. If the complaint is supported, appropriate corrections, denials or apologies should be published. Every report of unethical conduct should be considered, even if it came years after its publication.

 

ETHICAL AUTHORITY OF THE AUTHORS

Researches submitted for publication in the "Sociology of law" must be conducted in accordance with applicable Ukrainian law and ethical standards. The main responsibility of the author is to carry out such research that is worthy of objective discussion by the scientific community of its importance.

The authors of the articles are responsible for the content of the articles and for the very fact of their publication.

The author submits to the editorial board a manuscript of an article that has not previously been published and has not been submitted to other journals. Submitting a manuscript to multiple journals at the same time is unethical and unacceptable. The same applies to translating an article into a foreign language.

Authors must comply with all applicable manuscript publication requirements. Plagiarism and its extortion for original intelligence are inadmissible. In the event of plagiarism, the authors of the submitted materials are responsible.

The author submits for editorial review an article containing the results of the original study. If the author has used works in the article or includes fragments from works (quotations) of other persons in his article, then such use should be properly documented by specifying the original source in the bibliographic list in the article.

The author is obliged to correctly indicate the scientific and other sources which he used in the course of the study, which had a significant impact on the results of the study, in the bibliographic list. Information obtained from unofficial (private) sources should not be used when designing a scientific article.

The authors of the article should be those persons whose scientific contribution is significant in its content and who share responsibility for the results obtained. The author who submits the manuscript to the press is responsible for ensuring that the list of contributors includes all those persons who meet the criteria for authorship. In an article written by several authors, one of the authors who submits editorial contact information, documents and correspondence with the editors assumes responsibility for the consent of other authors of the article for its publication in the collection.

 

According to DORA principles, the journal: 

• evaluates manuscripts solely on the basis of their scientific quality, novelty, methodological soundness, and contribution to the development of science; 
• does not use journal scientometric indicators (in particular, Impact Factor) as a criterion for evaluating individual articles or the author’s expertise; 
• does not encourage artificial citation boosting; 
• supports the responsible use of scientometric indicators. 

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST 

The editorial staff of "Sociology of law" strives to ensure transparency at all stages of the publication process and to prevent conflicts of interest from affecting the objectivity of scientific evaluation and decision-making. 

A conflict of interest arises when personal, financial, professional, or other external circumstances may influence or appear to influence the impartiality of an author, reviewer, or editor. 

Authors are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could be perceived as influencing the results or interpretation of their research. These may include: 

• financial support; 
• employment or consulting relations; 
• stock ownership; 
• patents or patent applications; 
• personal or professional relations. 

Information about conflicts of interest should be presented in a separate section of the article. If there are no conflicts, it should be stated: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.” 

Reviewers are required to notify the editorial team if there is a potential conflict of interest (e.g., personal relationships with authors, recent co-authorship, competitive activities, etc.) and to decline to review if the conflict could affect evaluation objectivity. 

Editors should not participate in decision-making if they have a conflict of interest. In such cases, they should transfer their responsibilities to another member of the editorial board. 

The editorial board reserves the right to request additional information or take action if an undeclared conflict of interest is discovered after publication. 

 

PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING COMPLAINTS REGARDING VIOLATIONS OF ACADEMIC INTEGRITY AND PUBLICATION ETHICS 

The editorial board adheres to the principles of academic integrity, transparency, and responsibility, and is guided by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). 

Complaints regarding potential violations of academic integrity, plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, conflict of interest, duplicate or excessive publications, authorship, or other violations of publication ethics should be submitted to the editorial board in writing (by email), indicating the nature of the violation and providing justification or evidence. 

The editorial board conducts a preliminary assessment of complaint validity and its relevance to the journal’s scope. If necessary, the editorial board may contact the author(s) for clarification or additional materials. 

If the complaint is found to be justified, the editorial board initiates an internal investigation with the involvement of independent experts or members of the editorial board who are not involved in the review of the article in question. All parties have the right to be heard. 

Following the investigation, the editorial board shall make one of the decisions: 

• no violations and closure of the case; 
• request for corrections or explanations; 
• publication of a correction, cautionary note, or retraction of the article; 
• refusal to publish or prohibition on submitting manuscripts to the journal for a specified period; 
• informing the institution where the author works or other relevant authorities (if necessary). 

The complainant and author(s) are informed of the outcome of the complaint review in writing within the time frame set by the editorial board. Correspondence is confidential. 

All complaints are considered confidentially, objectively, and without discrimination. The editorial board ensures that there is no conflict of interest in the complaint review process. 

The editorial board reserves the right to act in accordance with international standards and COPE recommendations in cases not covered by this procedure. 

 

POLICY ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) AND AI-SUPPORTED TECHNOLOGIES

The editorial board of the scientific journal recognizes the growing role of artificial intelligence and AI-supported tools in academic writing, research, and publishing. The use of such technologies must comply with the principles of academic integrity, transparency, responsibility, and adherence to ethical standards. 

AI may be used solely as an auxiliary tool, not as an author or co-author of a scholarly work. 

Authors are fully responsible for the content of the submitted manuscript, regardless of the use of AI. 

All statements, interpretations, and conclusions must be based on verified scientific data and sources. 

Authors may use AI-supported tools for: 

• linguistic and stylistic editing; 
• improving the structure of data presentation; 
• translation; 
• search for general information or ideas for formulating research agenda. 

The following is not permitted: 

• using AI to create the main scholarly content, research results, conclusions, or interpretations; 
• presenting AI-generated text as an original work without proper verification and editing; 
• using AI to fabricate, falsify, or manipulate data; 
• listing AI as an author or co-author. 

Reviewers are prohibited from using AI tools to analyze manuscripts if such use may lead to a breach of confidentiality. 

The editorial board may use AI to technically check texts (e.g., for plagiarism or linguistic errors) without interfering with the scientific content. 

Violation of this policy is considered a violation of the principles of academic integrity and publication ethics and may result in: 

• rejection of the manuscript; 
• retraction of the published article; 
• notification of the institution the author is affiliated with. 

The editorial board reserves the right to update the relevant policy in line with technological developments and international standards in the field of academic publishing. 

 

RETRACTION PROCEDURE 

The editorial board adheres to the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and ensures transparent, timely, and reasonable procedures for retracting, correcting errors, and informing readers in case of issues in published materials. 

Article Retraction  

Retraction is applied in cases where: 

• major violations of academic integrity (plagiarism, fabrication, or falsification of data) have been identified; 
• significant errors have been identified that render the results unreliable; 
• violations of research ethics have been identified; 
• duplicate publication or other serious violations of publication ethics have been detected. 

The retraction procedure involves: 

• conducting an editorial review with the involvement of authors and, if necessary, institutions or ethics committees; 
• adoption of a reasoned decision by the editorial board; 
• publication of an official retraction notice. 

After retraction, the article is kept in the journals’ archive with a clear indication of its retraction. The text of the article is not deleted but marked as withdrawn with an explanation of the reasons. 

Corrections and Clarifications 

If errors are found that do not significantly affect the scholarly conclusions but require clarification or correction (typos, inaccuracies in data, names, tables, references, etc.), the editorial board will: 

publish an official correction notice (erratum or corrigendum); 

keeps the article’s original version in the archive; 

adds a note about the changes made to the article’s electronic version, indicating the date of the correction. 

All decisions regarding retractions and corrections are made in accordance with the principles of transparency, objectivity, fairness, and protection of academic integrity. 

 

POLICY ON ETHICAL APPROVAL FOR RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMANS, ANIMALS, BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS, OR PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL DATA 

Research submitted to the journal must be conducted in accordance with applicable laws, international ethical standards, and the internal regulations of the institutions where the research was carried out. 

If the research involves human participants (e.g., surveys, interviews, expert assessments, socio-economic or management studies), authors must: 

• ensure voluntary informed consent from participants to take part in the research; 
• guarantee the confidentiality and protection of rparticipants’ personal data; 
• obtain approval from the relevant ethics committee (if required by the institution or organization where the research was conducted). 

The article must state that the research was carried out in accordance with ethical standards and, where applicable, provide information about the approval or decision of the relevant ethics committee. 

When using personal, official, or other confidential data (e.g., statistical databases of enterprises, employee surveys, or restricted-access information), authors must: 

• comply with personal data protection legislation; 
• ensure the anonymization of information that could identify individuals or organizations, where necessary; 
• obtain appropriate permission to use such data if it is not publicly available.  

Although law research does not involve the use of animals or biological materials, if it does, authors must ensure compliance with ethical standards. In particular, authors must: 

• comply with international and national standards for the humane treatment of animals; 
• obtain appropriate ethical approval or permission from the relevant authority or bioethics committee. 

Authors are fully responsible for complying with ethical requirements during the conduct of the research and the use of the data obtained. The editorial board reserves the right to request confirmation of ethical approval or additional information regarding compliance with ethical standards. 

 

ANTI-PLAGIARISM POLICY

The editorial board of the journal strictly adheres to the principles of academic integrity and actively combats any form of plagiarism. Plagiarism is defined as the appropriation of authorship of someone else's scientific results, texts, ideas, illustrations, or data without proper citation of the source, including:

• Verbatim copying of texts without quotation marks or proper referencing;
• Paraphrasing without attribution to the original author;
• Using someone else's research results or experiments as one’s own.

All submitted articles are checked for plagiarism using the StrikePlagiarism.com software by the Polish company Plagiat.pl. If plagiarism or unethical borrowing is detected in the text, the editorial board reserves the right to reject the manuscript.

Authors are fully responsible for the originality of the submitted material. In the case of using other researchers' materials, proper citation and adherence to academic ethics are mandatory.