Editorial Fairness
Appeals and complaints are reviewed with neutrality, academic merit and documented editorial accountability.
Fairness, Transparency and Responsible Editorial Governance
International Journal of Arts, Commerce, Science and Technology (IJACST) is committed to maintaining fairness, transparency, neutrality, academic accountability and editorial independence in all publishing decisions. This Complaints and Appeals Policy provides a structured mechanism for authors, reviewers, readers and institutions to raise legitimate concerns related to editorial decisions, publication ethics, reviewer conduct, metadata accuracy and scholarly record integrity.
IJACST promotes a safe reporting environment where concerns are assessed with dignity, confidentiality and academic neutrality. Complaints and appeals are handled through a responsible scholarly governance framework inspired by internationally accepted publication ethics principles and COPE-style editorial practice.
Ethical Governance
The journal protects research integrity, reviewer confidentiality and responsible scholarly communication.
Metadata Integrity
Corrections, clarifications and outcomes are managed with careful attention to indexing and citation accuracy.
What Types of Complaints Are Considered?
IJACST considers complaints that relate to scholarly fairness, publication ethics, editorial conduct, reviewer behavior, metadata accuracy, DOI records, authorship disputes and administrative communication. Complaints should be factual, evidence-based and submitted through the official editorial communication channel.
Editorial Decisions
Appeals against perceived unfair rejection, misunderstanding of methodology or overlooked academic merit.
Reviewer Conduct
Concerns about reviewer bias, unprofessional comments, confidentiality breach or inappropriate review behavior.
Publication Ethics
Concerns related to plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, conflicts of interest or unethical authorship.
Metadata Errors
Correction requests involving author names, affiliations, article title, DOI metadata or indexing information.
DOI & Citation Concerns
Issues related to DOI display, citation accuracy, article discoverability or persistent link correction.
Administrative Delays
Concerns about communication gaps, delayed response, certificate issues or publication workflow updates.
Formal Appeal Procedure for Authors
Authors who believe that a manuscript decision was based on factual misunderstanding, technical misinterpretation or overlooked scholarly contribution may submit a formal, evidence-based appeal. Appeals should focus on scholarly merit, factual clarification and respectful academic justification.
Formal Appeal Email
Submit the appeal through the official editorial email with a clear subject line and manuscript ID.
Evidence-Based Explanation
Provide specific points responding to editorial or reviewer concerns with factual and scholarly evidence.
Co-author Consent
Appeals should be submitted with awareness and consent of all authors in multi-author manuscripts.
Respectful Communication
Appeals must remain professional, factual and focused on academic content rather than personal disagreement.
Complaint Investigation and Resolution Workflow
IJACST follows a structured workflow to ensure that complaints and appeals are handled with consistency, confidentiality and editorial fairness. Each case is reviewed according to its nature, available evidence and scholarly relevance.
Complaint Submission
The complainant submits a formal complaint with complete details and supporting evidence.
Acknowledgment
The Editorial Office acknowledges receipt and verifies whether the concern falls within policy scope.
Preliminary Review
Initial assessment is conducted to determine merit, urgency and required editorial action.
Independent Assessment
Where needed, neutral editorial members may review the case independently.
Final Decision
A reasoned decision or action plan is communicated to the concerned party.
Escalation
Complex or unresolved matters may be escalated to senior editorial or publisher-level review.
Editorial Review, Neutrality and Governance
IJACST promotes impartial editorial governance. Cases involving potential editorial conflict are independently evaluated to ensure unbiased academic resolution. The journal maintains confidential handling, ethical neutrality and fair communication throughout the complaints and appeals process.
Independent Review
Appeals may be reviewed by neutral editorial members not involved in the original decision.
Confidential Handling
Reviewer identity, complainant details and sensitive editorial records are protected.
Resolution, Corrections and Editorial Actions
Depending on the nature of the complaint or appeal, IJACST may issue a clarification, correction notice, metadata update, DOI correction, reviewer reassessment, editorial reconsideration or retraction review. All actions are handled with scholarly transparency and academic accountability.
Correction Notice
Formal correction may be issued when factual or metadata errors are verified.
DOI Correction
Article DOI and citation metadata may be updated when required.
Metadata Update
Structured records may be corrected for indexing and discovery accuracy.
Retraction Review
Serious ethical concerns may trigger a formal retraction investigation.
Research Integrity Commitment
IJACST follows a zero-tolerance policy toward academic misconduct and unethical publishing behavior. Complaints involving plagiarism, authorship manipulation, data fabrication, reviewer misconduct, citation abuse or ethical violation are investigated with seriousness and documented editorial care.
Plagiarism Screening
Originality Verification
Ethical Publishing
Anti-Malpractice Review
Responsible Authorship
Editorial Accountability
Confidentiality and Non-Retaliation Policy
IJACST provides a safe reporting environment for authors, reviewers, editors and readers. Genuine complaints are handled confidentially, and complainants will not face retaliation, discrimination or unfair editorial treatment for raising legitimate scholarly concerns.
Confidential Communication
Non-Retaliation Assurance
Safe Reporting
Fair Editorial Treatment
Metadata and Scholarly Record Integrity
All editorial corrections and resolutions are reflected through structured scholarly metadata updates whenever necessary. IJACST gives importance to DOI preservation, citation transparency, Google Scholar compatibility, CrossRef-ready metadata and indexing consistency.
DOI Preservation
DOI and citation identity are maintained for long-term scholarly traceability.
Google Scholar Compatibility
Editorial updates support accurate discovery, indexing and academic visibility.
Accessibility and Digital Transparency
IJACST policy pages are structured with semantic HTML, mobile-friendly readability, accessible labels, clear internal linking and discoverability-focused content. This supports both human readers and academic search systems in understanding the journal’s ethical framework.
Semantic HTML
Mobile Accessible
Public Transparency
Discoverability Ready
Frequently Asked Questions
Complaints and Appeals FAQ
How can I file a complaint with IJACST?
You may send a formal complaint to the Editorial Office with manuscript ID, details, supporting evidence and clear explanation.
Can authors appeal a rejection decision?
Yes. Authors may submit an evidence-based appeal if they believe the editorial decision involved factual or technical misunderstanding.
Does IJACST follow ethical publishing standards?
Yes. IJACST follows responsible scholarly communication practices, editorial fairness and publication ethics principles.
How long does complaint investigation take?
Simple matters may be addressed quickly, while complex complaints and appeals may take 2–6 weeks depending on investigation requirements.
Are complaints confidential?
Yes. Complaints are handled confidentially while maintaining fairness, transparency and ethical editorial governance.
Transparent Editorial Governance
Need Editorial Fairness Support?
IJACST is committed to fair appeal handling, ethical publishing, transparent complaint resolution and responsible scholarly communication.