Complaints and Appeals Policy

1. Purpose

Albuchuts is committed to handling complaints and appeals fairly, independently, confidentially, and transparently.

This policy provides procedures for concerns relating to:

editorial processes;
peer review;
editorial conduct;
reviewer conduct;
conflicts of interest;
publication ethics;
published articles;
editorial decisions.

A complaint or appeal will not result in retaliation against an author, reviewer, reader, or other person who raises a concern in good faith.

2. Difference Between a Complaint and an Appeal

A complaint concerns the conduct, procedure, ethics, administration, or integrity of the journal or publication process.

An appeal is a formal request by an author for reconsideration of an editorial decision concerning a manuscript that has undergone peer review.

The two procedures are handled separately.

3. Matters That May Be Raised as Complaints

Complaints may concern, among other matters:

unreasonable delays in editorial processing;
inappropriate conduct by an editor or reviewer;
failure to follow the journal’s stated editorial procedures;
undisclosed conflicts of interest;
breach of confidentiality;
plagiarism or duplicate publication;
authorship disputes;
citation manipulation;
suspected fabrication or falsification;
inappropriate use of generative AI;
concerns about research ethics;
errors or ethical concerns relating to a published article;
inappropriate editorial communication;
other matters affecting the integrity or fairness of the publication process.

Substantial ethical complaints should be assessed even when the complainant requests confidentiality, although the ability to investigate may depend on the amount and quality of information provided. Elsevier similarly states that substantive ethical complaints should be examined and that complainants may sometimes have legitimate reasons for preserving confidentiality.

4. How to Submit a Complaint

Complaints should be submitted in writing to:

Albuchuts Editorial Office
Email: albuchuts@mail.uns.ac.id

The subject line should clearly state:

Complaint – [brief description of the matter]

The complaint should include, where applicable:

the complainant’s name and contact information;
manuscript ID or DOI;
article title;
names of relevant parties;
a clear description of the concern;
relevant dates;
supporting documents or evidence;
the outcome or action requested.

Complaints should be factual, specific, and supported by relevant information.

5. Initial Assessment of Complaints

The Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor will conduct an initial assessment to determine:

whether the complaint falls within the journal’s responsibility;
whether sufficient information has been provided;
whether the matter concerns editorial procedure, research integrity, publication ethics, or another issue;
whether another editor or external party should handle the matter because of a conflict of interest.

Where necessary, additional information may be requested from the complainant.

6. Fair Process

A person against whom a substantive complaint is made will normally be informed of the relevant allegation and given a reasonable opportunity to respond.

The journal will not treat an allegation as proof of misconduct before the available information has been evaluated.

When a substantive complaint is raised against an author, reviewer, editor, or other party, the journal will normally inform the person concerned of the relevant allegation and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond before reaching a conclusion or determining appropriate action.

7. Complaints Concerning Editors

A complaint involving an editor will not be handled solely by that editor.

Where the complaint concerns:

an Associate Editor, it should be referred to the Editor-in-Chief;
the Editor-in-Chief, it should be referred to another independent member of the Editorial Board and, where appropriate, the publisher;
several members of the editorial team, an independent person or committee may be appointed.

Editorial independence must be preserved throughout the process. The journal likewise states that concerns regarding editorial decisions should be addressed through independent editorial structures and separated from commercial interests.

8. Complaints Concerning Reviewers

Complaints about reviewer conduct may include:

inappropriate or discriminatory comments;
personal attacks;
breach of confidentiality;
undisclosed competing interests;
coercive citation requests;
misuse of unpublished material;
suspected use of confidential manuscript content in external AI systems;
other conduct inconsistent with responsible peer review.

The editor may seek clarification from the reviewer and may remove inappropriate content from reviewer reports before communicating them to authors.

Where serious misconduct is substantiated, the reviewer may no longer be invited to review for the journal.

9. Publication Ethics Complaints

Where a complaint concerns possible:

plagiarism;
duplicate publication;
fabrication or falsification;
inappropriate authorship;
citation manipulation;
peer-review manipulation;
undisclosed competing interests;
ethical violations involving research participants;

the journal may seek information from:

authors;
reviewers;
editors of other journals;
employing institutions;
research institutions;
funding organizations;
other relevant bodies.

Albuchuts’s ethics guidance similarly recognizes that some allegations may require involvement of universities, funders, other journals, or other appropriate organizations.

10. Possible Outcomes of a Complaint

Depending on the nature and evidence of the complaint, Albuchuts may:

determine that no further action is required;
provide clarification;
correct an editorial or administrative error;
request further information;
request manuscript revision;
reconsider an editorial process;
replace a reviewer;
publish a correction;
publish an Expression of Concern;
retract an article;
remove an article only in exceptional circumstances;
refer the matter to an institution or other relevant body;
take another action necessary to protect the scholarly record.

Corrective action should be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the issue. Albuchuts likewise lists remedies ranging from corrections and expressions of concern to retraction, with removal reserved for exceptional circumstances.

11. Confidentiality

Complaints will be handled as confidentially as reasonably possible.

Information will be disclosed only to persons or organizations whose involvement is necessary for:

assessment;
investigation;
obtaining a response;
resolving the matter;
protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.

The journal may be unable to disclose all details of an investigation or its findings when doing so could compromise confidentiality, privacy, legal obligations, or the integrity of the process. Albuchuts applies a similar limitation in ethics investigations.

Editorial Appeals

12. Purpose of an Appeal

An appeal is intended to address a potentially significant error in:

the editorial evaluation;
interpretation of evidence;
application of journal policy;
peer-review process;
management of a relevant conflict of interest.

An appeal is not a new submission and does not automatically result in reconsideration or acceptance.

13. Decisions Eligible for Appeal

An appeal may be submitted for a manuscript that:

has undergone peer review; and
has received a revision or rejection decision that the authors believe contains a significant scholarly or procedural error.

A manuscript rejected during initial editorial screening without peer review is not normally eligible for formal appeal.

Disagreement with the editor’s assessment of general interest, priority, novelty, or suitability for Albuchuts, without evidence of a substantive error, is not normally sufficient grounds for appeal.

14. Who May Submit an Appeal

An appeal must be submitted by the corresponding author.

Before submission, all authors must agree to the appeal.

The corresponding author is responsible for representing the views of all authors during the appeal process.

15. Time Limit for Appeals

An appeal should be submitted within one month of the date of the editorial decision.

Appeals submitted after this period may be considered only in exceptional circumstances.

16. How to Submit an Appeal

Appeals must be submitted in writing to:

albuchuts@mail.uns.ac.id

The email subject should state:

Appeal – [Manuscript ID] – [Article Title]

The appeal letter must include:

manuscript ID;
manuscript title;
date of the editorial decision;
clear grounds for the appeal;
point-by-point response to the relevant editorial and reviewer comments;
supporting scholarly or procedural evidence;
description of any alleged factual or technical error;
information regarding any relevant conflict of interest or possible bias;
confirmation that all authors agree to the appeal.

General dissatisfaction with the outcome is not sufficient.

17. Evidence Required

Authors should identify precisely where they believe:

a reviewer or editor made a factual or technical error;
relevant evidence was misunderstood;
journal policy was applied incorrectly;
a material conflict of interest was overlooked;
a serious procedural irregularity affected the decision.

Arguments should be supported by scholarly evidence wherever possible.

18. Submission to Another Journal During an Appeal

While an appeal is under consideration, the manuscript must not be submitted to another journal.

Submitting the manuscript elsewhere will be treated as withdrawal of the appeal.

19. Handling of Appeals

Appeals are normally reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or a suitably designated editor.

Where the appeal alleges:

a conflict of interest involving the Editor-in-Chief;
bias by the Editor-in-Chief;
inappropriate handling by the Editor-in-Chief;

the appeal will be assigned to another independent member of the Editorial Board or another qualified person.

The editor handling the appeal should not have a conflict of interest concerning the manuscript.

20. Reconsideration and Further Review

If the appeal identifies grounds that warrant reconsideration, the manuscript may:

be reassessed by an editor;
be returned to previous reviewers;
be sent to one or more new reviewers;
require substantive revision;
undergo another appropriate assessment.

A successful appeal means only that the journal has agreed to reconsider the manuscript. It does not guarantee acceptance.

21. Outcome of an Appeal

Possible outcomes include:

the original decision is upheld;
the manuscript is returned for revision;
the manuscript is sent for further review;
the editorial decision is reconsidered.

The corresponding author will be informed of the outcome.

22. One Appeal per Submission

Albuchuts will normally consider only one formal appeal for each manuscript.

The decision following the appeal process will be final.

23. Withdrawal of an Appeal

The corresponding author may withdraw an appeal at any time before a final decision is issued.

The withdrawal request should be sent to the journal email with:

Appeal Withdrawal – [Manuscript ID]

in the subject line.

24. Complaints After Completion of an Appeal

A final appeal decision should not be reopened merely because the authors disagree with the result.

However, a separate complaint may still be considered if new evidence concerns:

research integrity;
editorial misconduct;
undisclosed conflict of interest;
discrimination;
breach of confidentiality;
other serious ethical or procedural matters.

25. Good-Faith Communication

All parties are expected to communicate professionally.

Abusive, threatening, discriminatory, defamatory, or harassing correspondence will not be considered an acceptable part of the complaint or appeal process.

Repeated correspondence that presents no new information may be closed by the journal after the issue has been addressed.