Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

COPE Compliance

The Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences (CJSS) adheres to the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity in scholarly publishing.

The journal follows COPE Core Practices in addressing all aspects of publication ethics, including authorship, peer review, conflicts of interest, data integrity, and post-publication corrections. In cases of suspected misconduct, such as data fabrication or falsification, plagiarism, unethical research practices, inappropriate image manipulation, or redundant publication, the editorial team acts in accordance with established COPE procedures and guidance.

All allegations of misconduct are assessed carefully and handled through a structured and transparent process, which may involve communication with authors, reviewers, and relevant institutions. Where necessary, appropriate actions are taken, including corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions.

Further information about COPE principles and guidelines can be found at: https://publicationethics.org
Detailed procedures applied by the journal are described in the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.

General Principles

The publication process at Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences is founded on the objective and ethical dissemination of scholarly knowledge. All participants, authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher are expected to adhere to internationally recognized research and publication ethics standards.

Peer-reviewed research constitutes the core of academic integrity and scientific advancement, and the journal is committed to safeguarding this process.

Misconduct

Research misconduct is understood as a serious breach of academic integrity and includes, but is not limited to:

  • Data fabrication: the invention of data or results that were not obtained through actual research;
  • Data falsification: manipulation of research materials, equipment, processes, or selective reporting/omission of data or results such that the research is not accurately represented;
  • Plagiarism: the use of another person’s work, ideas, or expressions without appropriate acknowledgment.

Additional forms of misconduct may include unethical research practices, inappropriate image manipulation, and redundant or duplicate publication.

Research misconduct does not include honest error, methodological disagreement, or differences in interpretation.

When misconduct is suspected, the Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences (CJSS) follows the procedures and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics. All allegations are carefully and confidentially assessed. Where necessary, the journal may request clarifications, involve relevant institutions, and take appropriate action, including rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

Plagiarism Detection

In accordance with its publishing ethics and integrity policies, the Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences screens all manuscripts for potential plagiarism as part of its editorial evaluation process. Similarity screening may be conducted at multiple stages of the editorial workflow, including prior to peer review, after completion of the double-blind peer review process, and before final acceptance for publication.

Plagiarism screening is carried out using Turnitin similarity detection software. Similarity reports are not evaluated solely on the basis of numerical percentage scores. Instead, all detected similarities are reviewed carefully and interpreted on a case-by-case basis, with due consideration of disciplinary norms and publishing context. Properly cited quotations, reference lists, bibliographic materials, standard methodological descriptions, and commonly used technical phrases are identified and excluded from concern.

Definition and Scope of Plagiarism

For the purposes of editorial assessment, plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

  • Direct plagiarism (verbatim copying without appropriate attribution);

  • Mosaic or patchwork plagiarism (substantial paraphrasing without proper acknowledgment);

  • Self-plagiarism or redundant publication (inappropriate reuse of an author’s own previously published work without disclosure or citation);

  • Duplicate or overlapping publication submitted concurrently or previously published elsewhere.

Limited text reuse in methods sections, doctoral or master’s theses, conference papers, or preprints may be acceptable where clearly disclosed and properly cited, and where it does not compromise the originality of the manuscript.

Editorial Assessment and Decision-Making

Where similarities remaining after initial filtering raise substantive concerns, these are examined in detail and reported to the Editorial Board. A high similarity score does not automatically result in rejection; rather, it triggers further editorial investigation to assess the nature, extent, location, and context of the overlap, as well as its impact on the originality and scholarly contribution of the work.

In all cases, authors are given the opportunity to respond to similarity findings and to provide clarification or justification where appropriate. Editorial decisions are made on the basis of both the similarity report and the authors’ explanations.

Based on the outcome of this assessment, the Editorial Board may:

  • request revisions or clarification from the author(s);

  • require correction or removal of problematic overlaps;

  • reject the manuscript in cases of confirmed plagiarism, redundant publication, or other unethical publication practices.

In serious or repeated cases of misconduct, the journal may take additional actions in accordance with COPE guidelines, including notification of the author’s institution or restrictions on future submissions.

Post-Publication Plagiarism

If potential plagiarism is identified after publication, the journal will investigate the matter in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines and COPE flowcharts. Depending on the severity and nature of the case, appropriate corrective actions may include publication of a correction, retraction, or expression of concern. All post-publication actions are clearly identified and permanently linked to the original article to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

Ethical Oversight

The plagiarism and similarity screening policy applies equally to all submitted manuscripts and to all parties involved in the publication process. Any concerns regarding potential plagiarism involving authors, reviewers, or editorial staff are handled confidentially, transparently, and in line with COPE Core Practices.

The Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences applies rigorous plagiarism screening standards while recognizing that similarity percentages must be interpreted in context. Editorial judgment, guided by international publishing ethics standards, plays a central role in all final decisions.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

The Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences is committed to maintaining the integrity, accuracy, and transparency of the scholarly record. This policy outlines the procedures and principles governing post-publication updates, including corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern, in accordance with internationally recognized standards of publication ethics.

The journal follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and established best practices in scholarly publishing.

Corrections

Corrections are issued when errors are identified in a published article that affect the accuracy, clarity, or integrity of the work but do not invalidate its overall findings or conclusions.

Corrections may be issued for, but are not limited to:

  • Errors in data presentation, analysis, or interpretation that may mislead readers.

  • Omission or misstatement of funding information, acknowledgements, ethical approvals, or conflicts of interest.

  • Errors in author names, affiliations, references, figures, tables, or metadata that affect attribution or discoverability.

Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect the scientific meaning of the article are generally not subject to formal correction.

All corrections are published promptly, clearly identified, and permanently linked to the original article. The original article remains accessible, with a transparent record of the correction.

Retraction Policies

Article Retraction

The Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences (CJSS) is committed to preserving the integrity of the scholarly record. Articles may be retracted when there is clear evidence that the published work is unreliable or has breached ethical or publication standards.

Retraction may be considered in cases including, but not limited to:

  • Unreliable findings, resulting either from research misconduct (such as data fabrication or falsification) or from significant unintentional errors that compromise the validity of the study;
  • Redundant or duplicate publication, where the work has been published elsewhere without appropriate acknowledgment, permission, or justification;
  • Plagiarism or other serious violations of academic and publication ethics.

Retraction is undertaken to correct the literature and inform readers, not as a punitive measure against authors.

Retraction Procedure

All retraction decisions are made following careful assessment by the editorial team, in line with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics Retraction Guidelines.

  • Concerns regarding a published article may be raised by editors, authors, reviewers, or readers.
  • The journal conducts a thorough and impartial evaluation, which may include communication with the authors and, where appropriate, their affiliated institutions.
  • If the grounds for retraction are confirmed, a formal retraction notice is issued, clearly stating the reasons for the retraction.

To ensure transparency and traceability:

  • the original article remains accessible online;
  • the PDF version is clearly marked as “Retracted” on each page;
  • the article record (metadata and online version) is updated to indicate its retracted status and to link to the retraction notice.

In exceptional circumstances, such as legal requirements, the journal may remove or replace content; however, the bibliographic record and retraction notice will always remain available.

Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued when there are serious and well-founded concerns about the integrity or reliability of a published article, but the available evidence is inconclusive or an investigation is ongoing.

Expressions of Concern may be published when:

  • An institutional or editorial investigation is underway but not yet resolved.

  • There are credible allegations of misconduct that require further verification.

  • Key information necessary to assess the validity of the work is unavailable or delayed.

Expressions of Concern are clearly labeled, indexed, and linked to the original article and remain in place until a final decision (correction, retraction, or no action) is reached.

Errata & Corrigenda

The Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences (CJSS) applies internationally recognized standards for post-publication corrections in the social sciences, ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.

Errata

Errata are issued to correct minor errors in a published article that do not affect the interpretation, validity, or conclusions of the research. These may include typographical errors, formatting issues, citation inaccuracies, or minor metadata inconsistencies.

In such cases:

  • a corrected version of the article is made available;
  • a formal erratum notice is published, clearly identifying the correction;
  • the original version remains archived, with a clear reference to the corrected version.

Corrigenda

Corrigenda are published when more substantial errors are identified that may affect the clarity, accuracy, or interpretation of the work, but do not invalidate the overall findings.

These may include:

  • errors in data presentation, tables, or figures;
  • inaccuracies in argumentation, interpretation, or referencing;
  • authorship corrections;
  • omissions or clarifications relevant to the scholarly content.

Corrigenda are published as separate, citable documents and are directly linked to the original article.

Editorial Responsibility

The decision to issue an erratum or corrigendum is made by the editorial team in consultation with the authors. All corrections are implemented transparently and in accordance with the journal’s ethical standards.

Responses to Possible Misconduct

The Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences (CJSS) takes any concern about potential misconduct seriously and handles such cases with care, discretion, and fairness. Concerns may be raised at any stage of the publication process by authors, reviewers, editors, or readers, and are considered by the Editor-in-Chief.

Each situation is examined individually. The editorial team reviews the available information and, where necessary, asks the authors to provide clarification or further explanation. In some instances, concerns arise from misunderstanding or honest error, and these can be resolved through clarification or correction.

When there is reason to believe that a more serious issue may be involved, the journal looks more closely into the matter, sometimes consulting with members of the editorial board or, if appropriate, the authors’ institutions. Throughout this process, the journal treats all parties with respect and keeps the matter confidential as far as possible.

If a breach of ethical standards is confirmed, the journal will respond in a way that reflects the nature of the case. This may include rejecting a manuscript, issuing a correction or retraction, or informing the relevant institution. In certain cases, the journal may also decide not to consider future submissions from the individuals involved for a period of time.

If concerns arise while a manuscript is under review, the review process may be paused until the matter is resolved. Withdrawal of a submission does not necessarily bring the matter to a close if serious concerns remain. Where reviewers or editors are involved in a case, they are removed from the process while the issue is examined.

The journal follows the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics and aims to handle all such situations responsibly, with attention to fairness and to the integrity of the published record.