Scientific Works «Adult Education: Theory, Experience, Prospects» carries out its editorial work on the basis of academic integrity, editorial independence, scholarly quality, transparency of procedures, non-discrimination, and respect for all participants in the editorial and publishing process.

The Editorial Policy of the journal defines the main principles, functions, responsibilities, and approaches to editorial decision-making on submitted manuscripts, as well as the principles of communication between the editorial office and authors, reviewers, readers, members of the editorial board, and other interested parties.

The editorial office of the Scientific Works «Adult Education: Theory, Experience, Prospects» develops and implements its editorial policy with due regard to the recommendations of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), WAME (World Association of Medical Editors), and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (COPE/DOAJ/OASPA/WAME). The journal also supports the principles of responsible research assessment in line with the approaches promoted by DORA, and therefore does not use expected citation impact, journal-based metrics, or irrelevant citation practices as criteria for editorial decisions. These principles are implemented in the journal’s Editorial Policy and in its separate policies on publication ethics, conflicts of interest, peer review, authorship, the use of AI, plagiarism detection, post-publication changes, citation manipulation, non-discrimination, confidentiality, open access, and other editorial procedures.

1. General Principles of Editorial Work

1.1. The editorial office follows the principles of scholarly objectivity, professional integrity, openness, responsibility, and fairness.

1.2. Editorial decisions are made only on the basis of the scholarly value of the manuscript, its fit with the journal’s scope, academic quality, methodological soundness, ethical acceptability, and the results of peer review.

1.3. The editorial office does not allow any influence on editorial decisions from the founder, publisher, sponsors, partners, advertisers, or from political, commercial, or personal interests.

1.4. Submission, peer review, editorial assessment, and acceptance of articles for publication are carried out in line with the approved journal policies published on the official website of the journal.

1.5. The editorial office supports high standards of scholarly communication, promotes international academic cooperation, ensures an appropriate level of editorial culture, and seeks to improve its editorial processes on a regular basis.

1.6. The journal follows the principles of non-discrimination and equal treatment at all stages of the editorial and publishing process. Submission, consideration, peer review, editorial evaluation, and publication decisions are carried out without discrimination on any non-academic grounds. Detailed provisions are set out in the Declaration on Non-Discrimination and Equal Treatment.

2. Editorial Independence

2.1. The Editor-in-Chief and the editorial board manage the journal independently and without outside influence.

2.2. No person or organisation may interfere in the assessment of a manuscript, the selection of reviewers, the content of an editorial decision, or the editorial position of the journal.

2.3. If an editor has a real, potential, or perceived conflict of interest, that editor must not take part in the consideration of the relevant manuscript. In such a case, the responsibility is transferred to another editor or authorised member of the editorial board.

2.4. Editorial independence also means editorial responsibility: every decision must be reasoned, properly documented, and able to be explained to the author within editorial communication.

3. Main Functions and Responsibilities of the Editorial Office

3.1. The editorial office ensures:

• initial assessment of manuscripts for their fit with the journal scope and technical requirements;
• checking materials for compliance with academic integrity standards;
• organisation of independent peer review;
• reasoned editorial decisions;
• proper editorial communication with authors and reviewers;
• publication of accurate information about journal policies and procedures;
• response to complaints, appeals, ethical concerns, and post-publication issues;
• protection of the integrity of the scholarly record.

3.2. The responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief include:

• strategic management of the journal’s development;
• control over compliance with editorial and ethical standards;
• approval or review of editorial decisions in difficult or disputed cases;
• ensuring consistency of journal policies;
• decision-making in cases of ethical breaches, appeals, complaints, and post-publication changes.

3.3. Members of the editorial board take part in the development of the journal, expert support of editorial activity, selection of reviewers, shaping the thematic profile of the journal, maintaining scholarly standards, and promoting the journal in the academic community.

3.4. The participation of the editorial board must be real and meaningful. Formal inclusion of persons in the editorial board without their actual professional involvement is not allowed.

4. Initial Editorial Assessment of Manuscripts

4.1. After a manuscript is received, the editorial office carries out an initial check, which may include:

• fit with the subject area and scope of the journal;
• compliance with structural, language, bibliographic, and technical requirements;
• completeness of the submitted documents and declarations;
• availability of the necessary information about the authors;
• academic integrity screening;
• checking compliance with the Conflict of Interest Policy, Artificial Intelligence Policy, research ethics requirements, and other relevant journal policies.

4.2. At the initial stage, the editorial office may reject a manuscript without sending it for peer review if:

• it does not fit the journal’s scope;
• it clearly has an insufficient scholarly level;
• it does not meet basic ethical requirements;
• it contains signs of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or other serious breaches;
• it is prepared with serious formal problems that make further editorial consideration impossible.

4.3. Rejection at the initial stage is not a sign of bias. It is used to maintain academic quality and the effectiveness of the editorial process.

5. Peer Review and Editorial Decision

5.1. All manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial assessment are sent for peer review in line with the journal’s Peer Review Policy.

5.2. Editorial decisions are based on:

• the manuscript’s fit with the journal’s subject area;
• scholarly originality and importance;
• theoretical and methodological quality;
• logic, structure, and clarity of presentation;
• proper use of sources;
• compliance with academic integrity;
• peer review results;
• the value of revision, if the manuscript can be improved.

5.3. The final decision on publication, revision, or rejection of a manuscript is made by the editorial office of the journal.

5.4. The editorial office is not required to agree with every separate wording of a reviewer, but it must consider the content of the reviews when making the final decision.

5.5. If the reviews contradict each other, the editorial office may:

• send the manuscript for an additional review;
• ask reviewers for clarification;
• make a decision after editorial discussion with proper reasoning.

6. Communication with Authors

6.1. The editorial office ensures professional, respectful, and timely communication with authors on all matters related to the editorial consideration of a manuscript.

6.2. Authors have the right to:

• receive information about the result of the initial assessment and peer review;
• receive a reasoned editorial decision;
• submit a revised version of the manuscript if such an opportunity is given;
• provide reasoned explanations in response to reviewer comments;
• submit an appeal if they disagree with the editorial decision.

6.3. The editorial office does not allow discrimination against authors on the grounds of sex, age, race, ethnic origin, citizenship, language, religion, political views, institutional affiliation, academic status, or other non-academic factors.

6.4. Submission of a manuscript does not guarantee its acceptance for publication. The decision on publication is made only after the proper editorial and expert procedure has been completed.

7. Communication with Reviewers

7.1. The editorial office selects reviewers on the basis of their professional expertise, experience, absence of conflict of interest, and ability to provide an independent and reasoned assessment.

7.2. Reviewers are given the necessary guidance, a review form, and information on the ethical requirements for peer review.

7.3. The editorial office ensures the confidentiality of peer review according to the model defined in the Peer Review Policy.

7.4. The editorial office does not put pressure on reviewers and does not tolerate biased, offensive, unethical, or manipulative reviews.

7.5. If a review is of poor quality, if a conflict of interest is found, or if ethical requirements are breached, the editorial office may replace the reviewer and disregard that review.

8. Communication with Readers and the Academic Community

8.1. The editorial office seeks to provide readers with high-quality, reliable, scholarly valuable, and ethically acceptable materials.

8.2. Readers may contact the editorial office with reports about errors, ethical concerns, technical problems, doubts about published materials, or other comments related to the content of the journal.

8.3. The editorial office considers reasoned comments from readers and, where necessary, starts an editorial or ethical review in line with the current journal policies.

9. Confidentiality

9.1. The editorial office undertakes to keep confidential all unpublished manuscripts, reviews, editorial materials, and internal communication, except in cases where disclosure is necessary as part of an ethical review or required by law.

9.2. Unpublished materials must not be used by editors, reviewers, or other persons involved in the editorial process for their own research, professional, or personal interests.

10. Complaints, Appeals, and Requests

10.1. The journal accepts:

• complaints about editorial procedures;
• reports of ethical breaches;
• notifications of conflicts of interest;
• appeals against editorial decisions;
• requests concerning post-publication changes.

10.2. Each request is considered individually, fairly, confidentially, and with proper documentation.

10.3. Submission of an appeal does not automatically mean that the decision will be changed, but it requires the editorial office to consider the applicant’s arguments and provide a response within a reasonable time.

10.4. If the Journal receives reports or complaints about possible breaches of academic integrity, publication ethics, editorial conduct, or editorial procedures, it acts in accordance with the separate Policy for the Handling of Complaints on Breaches of Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics.

11. Editorial Integrity and Consistency of Policies

11.1. The Editorial Policy of the journal is applied together with the other journal policies.

11.2. If differences arise between separate policies, the editorial office seeks to harmonise them as quickly as possible and applies the approach that best supports transparency, academic integrity, and the protection of the scholarly record.

12. Final Provisions

12.1. This Editorial Policy is the main framework document that defines the general principles of editorial governance of the journal.

12.2. The editorial office may update this Policy in order to bring it into line with international standards of scholarly publishing, national requirements, and the development of the journal’s editorial practice.

12.3. The current version of this Policy is published on the official website of the journal.

12.4. The editorial office periodically reviews this Policy in view of developments in international recommendations on publication ethics, editorial independence, transparency, and responsible research assessment.