Appeals and Complaints Policy

Appeals and Complaints Policy:

       Academic Sciences Journal (ASJ) welcome the appeals to editor decisions. However, the author has to provide new data/information and strong evidence in response to the editor’s and reviewers’ comments. An appeal or complaint shall only be considered as official if substantiated by appropriate evidence, references, and examples.

The procedures and actions regarding the complaints received by Academic Sciences Journal (ASJ) are welcomed and try to solve the issue until the Author is convinced and satisfied, at the same time we would like to inform our authors and readers to read and understand the instructions to the authors and the policy of the journal properly because we will receive only the complaints whose explanations are not given in the software of ASJ.

The complaint may be due to the long delay in publication or a reply related to the author, or about the decision of the editorial board regarding the articles. Sometimes, the complaints may be about the rude responses or a misjudgment of the editorial board. If the author wishes to appeal a journal editor’s decision, then he should submit an appeal letter to the editorial office of the journal, and explain clearly the basis for an appeal. Detail why the author disagree with the decision, and provide specific responses to any of the reviewers’ and/or editor’s comments that contributed to the reject decision. Provide evidence if you believe a reviewer has made technical errors in their assessment of his manuscript. Include evidence if he believes a reviewer may have a conflict of interest. Editors will consider one appeal per article and all decisions on appeals are final. The timely review and decision-making process for new submissions will take precedence over appeals.

ASJ is aware about the following complaints:

• Submitting the article to various journals at the same time.
• Research results misappropriations.
• Violations of research standards.
• Bias behavior of reviewers.
• Regarding the research errors and fraud.
• Conflicts of interest.