Appeals and Complaints

Introduction

AL-Yarmouk Journal (ALYJ) is committed to transparency, fairness, and the highest standards of academic integrity throughout its editorial processes. We recognize that authors, reviewers, and other stakeholders may occasionally disagree with editorial decisions or have concerns about the conduct of the journal. This policy establishes clear, fair, and accessible procedures for submitting appeals and complaints.

This policy is aligned with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applies to all parties involved in the journal's publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, and readers.

2. Scope

This policy covers two distinct categories of formal submissions:

2.1 Appeals

An appeal is a formal request by an author to reconsider an editorial decision. Appeals may be submitted in response to:

  • Rejection of a manuscript following initial screening or peer review.
  • A request for major revisions that the author believes is based on a misunderstanding or factual error.
  • Concerns that the peer-review process was conducted unfairly, inconsistently, or without adequate expertise in the relevant subject area.

2.2 Complaints

A complaint is a formal expression of concern regarding any aspect of the journal's processes or conduct. Complaints may relate to:

  • Alleged bias, misconduct, or inappropriate behavior by an editor, reviewer, or member of the editorial board.
  • Breaches of the journal's publication ethics policy (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission).
  • Concerns about the integrity or accuracy of a published article.
  • Undue delays in the editorial or review process without adequate explanation.
  • Violations of the journal's stated confidentiality or conflict-of-interest policies.
  • Any other matter relating to the journal's adherence to ethical publishing standards.

3. General Principles

All appeals and complaints submitted to AL-Yarmouk Journal will be handled in accordance with the following principles:

  1. Fairness: Every submission will be considered impartially, without prejudice toward the complainant or appellant.
  2. Confidentiality: The identities of all parties involved will be kept strictly confidential throughout the process, to the extent permitted by the investigation.
  3. Timeliness: The journal will acknowledge receipt promptly and aim to resolve all matters within the timeframes set out in this policy.
  4. Independence: Where a complaint concerns an editor or member of the editorial board, a different, uninvolved editor will handle the matter.
  5. Transparency: Appellants and complainants will be informed of the outcome of their submission, together with a reasoned explanation.
  6. Good faith: This process is intended for genuine concerns. Frivolous, vexatious, or repeated submissions without new evidence may not be considered.

4. Appeals Procedure

4.1 Grounds for Appeal

Appeals will only be considered where there is a substantive reason to believe that the original decision was affected by one or more of the following:

  • A significant factual or methodological error in the review that demonstrably affected the outcome.
  • Evidence of bias, conflict of interest, or procedural unfairness on the part of a reviewer or editor.
  • Failure to address the central scientific or scholarly contribution of the work.
  • Reviewer comments that fall outside the scope of the manuscript's subject area, suggesting a mismatch of expertise.

 

Appeals based solely on disagreement with the reviewers' assessment of the significance or novelty of the work, without identifying a specific error or breach of process, will not generally be considered.

4.2 How to Submit an Appeal

Appeals must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief via the journal's official email address. The appeal must be received within 30 days of the date of the editorial decision letter.

The appeal submission must include all of the following:

  1. A clear statement that the submission is a formal appeal.
  2. The manuscript ID and title.
  3. The date of the original editorial decision.
  4. A detailed, point-by-point explanation of the grounds for the appeal, specifying the alleged error, bias, or breach of process.
  5. Supporting evidence or documentation, where applicable.
  6. A rebuttal of reviewer comments, if the appeal relates to the substantive review.

Appeals that do not include the required information, or that are submitted after the deadline, may not be considered.

4.3 Appeals Review Process

Upon receipt of a valid appeal, the following steps will be taken:

  1. Acknowledgment: The appellant will receive written acknowledgment within 5 business days.
  2. Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief, or a designated Senior Editor, will conduct an initial review to determine whether the appeal raises legitimate grounds for reconsideration.
  3. Reconsideration: If the appeal is deemed valid, the manuscript may be sent to a new reviewer with relevant expertise, or the original decision may be reviewed by a member of the editorial board not previously involved in the manuscript.
  4. Decision: A final decision will be communicated to the appellant, with a reasoned explanation, within 60 days of the appeal being acknowledged.

The outcome of the appeals process may be: (a) the original decision is upheld; (b) the manuscript is returned for further review; or (c) the original decision is reversed. The decision reached at the conclusion of the appeals process is final.

5. Complaints Procedure

5.1 How to Submit a Complaint

Complaints may be submitted by any individual, including authors, reviewers, readers, and third parties. Complaints must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief via the journal's official email address, unless the complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief directly, in which case it should be addressed to the Publisher at Alyarmuk University College.

The complaint must include:

  1. The full name and contact details of the complainant.
  2. A clear description of the nature of the complaint.
  3. Details of the parties involved, including any relevant manuscript IDs, article titles, or dates.
  4. Any supporting evidence or documentation.
  5. A statement of the outcome the complainant is seeking.

5.2 Complaints Review Process

The journal will follow the procedure below for all complaints:

  1. Acknowledgment: The complainant will receive written acknowledgment within 5 business days of receipt.
  2. Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief, or a designated independent editor, will assess the complaint and determine the appropriate course of action.
  3. Investigation: Where warranted, a formal investigation will be conducted. This may involve consulting the parties named in the complaint, seeking independent expert opinion, or reviewing relevant correspondence and records.
  4. Resolution: The journal will aim to resolve complaints within 60 days of acknowledgment. If a longer period is required, the complainant will be notified and provided with an updated timeline.
  5. Outcome: The complainant will be informed in writing of the outcome of the investigation and the actions taken, to the extent permitted by confidentiality obligations.

5.3 Potential Outcomes

Depending on the nature and outcome of the investigation, potential responses may include:

  • Issuing a correction, clarification, or expression of concern.
  • Retraction of a published article in accordance with the journal's retraction policy.
  • Contacting the relevant author's institution.
  • A formal apology or acknowledgment of error.
  • Changes to editorial policies or procedures.
  • Referral to relevant external bodies, such as COPE, in cases of serious or systemic misconduct.

6. Post-Publication Concerns

Concerns about the integrity of a published article — including suspected errors, data fabrication, plagiarism, or undisclosed conflicts of interest — may be submitted at any time. Such concerns will be treated as complaints under this policy and investigated in accordance with COPE guidelines for handling post-publication cases.

Where a published article is found to contain significant errors or ethical breaches, the journal will take appropriate corrective action, which may include issuing a correction notice, an expression of concern, or a retraction. All such actions will be clearly identified in the published record.

7. Escalation

If a complainant or appellant is not satisfied with the outcome of the process as described in this policy, they may escalate their concern to COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) if they believe that this journal has not followed COPE's guidelines. Further information is available at: www.publicationethics.org.

8. Contact Information

All appeals and complaints should be submitted to:

Journal: AL-Yarmouk Journal (ALYJ)

Publisher: Alyarmuk University College, Baqubah, Diyala Governorate, Iraq

Website: https://journal.al-yarmok.edu.iq

Print ISSN: 2075-2954

Online ISSN: 3080-8758