Complaint Handling Procedure

1. Purpose

This Complaint Handling Procedure is established to ensure that all complaints received by the Journal of Scientia Technologiae are handled professionally, transparently, fairly, and in a timely manner. The procedure aims to safeguard the integrity, credibility, and academic quality of the journal.

2. Scope

This procedure applies to all complaints related to the editorial and publication processes, including but not limited to:

  • Manuscript submission and peer-review process

  • Editorial decisions

  • Publication ethics issues (plagiarism, duplicate publication, conflicts of interest)

  • Quality of published articles

  • Conduct of editors, reviewers, or authors

  • Errors in article metadata, content, or layout

3. Eligible Complainants

Complaints may be submitted by:

  • Authors

  • Reviewers

  • Editors

  • Readers

  • Institutions or other relevant stakeholders

4. Complaint Submission Channels

Complaints must be submitted in written form through:

  • The official journal email address

  • The journal’s online journal management system

Each complaint should include:

  • Complainant’s name and institutional affiliation

  • Contact information

  • A clear and chronological description of the complaint

  • Supporting evidence, if available

5. Classification of Complaints

Complaints are classified into the following categories:

  1. Administrative Complaints: delays, technical issues, or metadata errors.

  2. Editorial Complaints: editorial decisions, peer-review process, or communication issues.

  3. Publication Ethics Complaints: plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, citation manipulation, conflicts of interest, or other ethical misconduct.

6. Complaint Handling Procedure

6.1 Receipt of Complaint

  • The complaint is received and recorded in the journal’s internal complaint log.

  • An acknowledgment of receipt is sent to the complainant within a maximum of five (5) working days.

6.2 Preliminary Assessment

  • The Editor in Chief conducts an initial assessment to determine the nature, scope, and urgency of the complaint.

  • Administrative complaints may be handled directly by the Managing Editor.

6.3 Investigation

  • For editorial and ethical complaints, the Editor in Chief appoints a small investigation team consisting of relevant editors.

  • Editors, reviewers, or authors involved may be asked to provide written clarification.

  • In cases related to publication ethics, the journal follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

6.4 Decision Making

  • Decisions are made objectively and independently based on the investigation findings.

  • Possible outcomes include:

    • Formal clarification or explanation to the complainant

    • Administrative or technical corrections

    • Re-review of the manuscript

    • Publication of corrections or expressions of concern

    • Retraction of the article

    • Sanctions against parties involved in ethical misconduct

6.5 Communication of Results

  • The final decision and actions taken are communicated in writing to the complainant.

  • The journal endeavors to resolve complaints within thirty (30) working days, depending on the complexity of the case.

7. Confidentiality and Independence

  • The identities of complainants and involved parties are kept confidential.

  • Complaints are handled without conflicts of interest.

  • Individuals who are the subject of the complaint are excluded from the decision-making process.

8. Documentation and Record Keeping

  • All complaints and their resolutions are documented and archived internally.

  • Complaint records are used for evaluation and continuous improvement of journal management.

9. Appeals

  • Complainants may submit one appeal against the decision.

  • Appeals are reviewed by the Editor in Chief in consultation with the Editorial Board.

  • The decision resulting from the appeal process is final.

10. Final Provisions

This Complaint Handling Procedure reflects the commitment of the Journal of Scientia Technologiae to uphold publication ethics, professionalism, and academic integrity. The procedure is reviewed periodically to align with best practices and evolving publication standards.