1. Policy Statement

The Journal of Integrated Elementary Education (JIEEd) is committed to maintaining fairness, transparency, accountability, editorial independence, and professional conduct throughout the scholarly publishing process.

The journal recognizes the right of authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders to raise legitimate concerns regarding editorial decisions, publication procedures, ethical conduct, and the integrity of published research.

This policy establishes clear procedures for submitting, assessing, and resolving editorial appeals and formal complaints.

JIEEd handles these matters in accordance with internationally recognized principles of scholarly publishing, including relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

All appeals and complaints are evaluated fairly, confidentially, impartially, and based on relevant evidence.

2. Scope and Types of Concerns

This policy distinguishes between editorial appeals and formal complaints.

Category	Description
Editorial Appeal	A formal request to reconsider an editorial decision based on substantive scientific, factual, or procedural grounds
Editorial Process Complaint	A concern regarding fairness, delays, communication, confidentiality, or compliance with established editorial procedures
Professional Conduct Complaint	An allegation of inappropriate conduct by an editor, reviewer, or editorial staff member
Publication Ethics Complaint	A concern involving conflicts of interest, authorship, plagiarism, peer-review manipulation, or other ethical issues
Post-Publication Complaint	A concern regarding a published article, correction, expression of concern, retraction, or related editorial action
Journal Management Complaint	A concern regarding journal policies, transparency, administrative services, or publication practices

Concerns involving suspected research misconduct or the reliability of published findings are also subject to the journal's separate Research Misconduct Policy and Corrections and Retractions Policy.

3. Fundamental Principles

JIEEd applies the following principles when handling appeals and complaints.

3.1 Fairness and Impartiality

All concerns must be considered objectively and without discrimination.

Individuals involved in a complaint or appeal must not be presumed responsible for misconduct solely because a concern has been raised.

3.2 Evidence-Based Assessment

Appeals and complaints must be evaluated using relevant facts, documentation, scientific arguments, and other available evidence.

3.3 Editorial Independence

Decisions must remain free from inappropriate personal, institutional, financial, or commercial influence.

3.4 Confidentiality

Information relating to appeals, complaints, manuscripts, reviewer reports, and other confidential materials must be protected in accordance with applicable ethical and data-protection requirements.

3.5 Conflict-of-Interest Management

Individuals with significant competing interests must not determine the outcome of an appeal or complaint involving those interests.

3.6 Transparency and Accountability

The journal must provide an appropriate explanation of its decisions and maintain relevant records of the procedures followed.

3.7 Professional Communication

All parties are expected to communicate respectfully and constructively.

Disagreements must be expressed through reasoned arguments rather than personal attacks, intimidation, or harassment.

4. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may request reconsideration of an editorial decision when they believe that a substantial scientific, factual, or procedural issue has affected the outcome.

An appeal is not an automatic entitlement to additional peer review or manuscript acceptance.

Appeals must present specific grounds supported by appropriate evidence.

4.1 Grounds for Appeal

An appeal may be considered when:

A significant factual error influenced the editorial decision.
A substantial scientific argument or methodological explanation was misunderstood.
Relevant evidence presented in the manuscript was overlooked.
A serious procedural irregularity affected the evaluation.
A significant conflict of interest may have compromised the reviewer's or editor's impartiality.
The decision was based on demonstrably incorrect information.
The editorial process materially departed from the journal's published policies without appropriate justification.

4.2 Matters That Do Not Ordinarily Justify an Appeal

The following circumstances do not, by themselves, constitute sufficient grounds for appeal:

General disagreement with a rejection decision.
Dissatisfaction with critical reviewer comments.
An author's belief that the study deserves publication without supporting evidence of editorial error.
Requests for preferential treatment.
Differences in legitimate scholarly interpretation are unsupported by a demonstrated assessment error.
Submitting a revised manuscript without identifying an error in the original decision.

Authors should recognize that reasonable scientific judgments may differ and that editorial decisions involve assessment of scholarly merit and journal suitability.

5. How to Submit an Editorial Appeal

Appeals should be submitted by the corresponding author through the journal's official editorial contact.

Email: [email protected]

Suggested Subject: Editorial Decision Appeal – JIEEd – [Manuscript ID]

An appeal should include:

The manuscript title and OJS submission ID.
The name and contact information of the corresponding author.
The date and nature of the editorial decision being appealed.
A clear explanation of the grounds for reconsideration.
Specific references to disputed editorial or reviewer comments.
Relevant scientific arguments or documentary evidence.
Any additional information necessary to evaluate the appeal.

Authors should submit the appeal promptly after receiving the decision.

The manuscript must not be submitted simultaneously to another journal while an appeal concerning its rejection remains under consideration. Authors wishing to submit elsewhere should first withdraw the appeal or otherwise confirm that the JIEEd process has concluded.

Authors should not submit a substantially revised manuscript as a new submission to bypass an unresolved appeal.

6. Editorial Appeal Procedure

JIEEd follows a structured process for evaluating appeals.

Stage 1 — Receipt and Registration

The editorial office receives the appeal and records the manuscript details, disputed decision, and supporting materials.

Stage 2 — Preliminary Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized independent editor determines whether the appeal presents specific, relevant, and sufficiently supported grounds for reconsideration.

Appeals that do not identify a substantive concern may be declined without further review.

Stage 3 — Conflict-of-Interest Assessment

The journal assesses whether individuals involved in the original decision have competing interests that could compromise the reconsideration process.

An independent editor is appointed when necessary.

Stage 4 — Examination of Editorial Records

The responsible editor examines relevant materials, which may include:

The submitted manuscript.
The original editorial decision.
Reviewer reports.
Author responses and revision records.
Relevant editorial correspondence.
Supporting scientific or procedural evidence.

Stage 5 — Independent Consultation

Where justified, the journal may seek an additional assessment from an independent editor, qualified reviewer, or relevant scientific expert.

Additional review is undertaken only when necessary to resolve a substantive issue.

Stage 6 — Reconsideration and Decision

The responsible editor evaluates the evidence and determines whether the original decision should be upheld, modified, or reconsidered through further editorial assessment.

Stage 7 — Communication of Outcome

The corresponding author is informed of the appeal outcome and receives an appropriate explanation.

The journal documents the decision and relevant supporting information.

7. Possible Outcomes of an Editorial Appeal

An appeal may result in one of the following outcomes.

Outcome	Explanation
Appeal Declined	The appeal does not establish sufficient grounds for reconsideration.
Original Decision Upheld	The evaluation finds no material error or procedural deficiency affecting the original decision.
Further Editorial Assessment	Additional clarification or an independent assessment is required.
Manuscript Reconsidered	The original decision is modified, and the manuscript returns to an appropriate editorial or peer-review stage.
Procedural Correction	An identified editorial-process error is corrected, with further assessment where necessary.

A successful appeal does not guarantee manuscript acceptance.

A manuscript returned to peer review remains subject to the journal's normal scientific and ethical assessment requirements.

The decision issued after completion of the appeal process is ordinarily final, except where significant new evidence or a serious procedural concern justifies further examination.

8. Formal Complaints

JIEEd accepts formal complaints concerning editorial procedures, professional conduct, ethical compliance, journal management, and other matters affecting publication integrity.

Complaints may be submitted by authors, reviewers, readers, editors, institutions, or other individuals with relevant information.

8.1 Editorial and Peer-Review Complaints

Complaints may concern:

Substantial or unexplained departures from the journal's published editorial procedures.
Unreasonable communication problems or avoidable administrative delays.
Potentially biased manuscript assessment.
Inappropriate reviewer conduct.
Breaches of peer-review confidentiality.
Undisclosed or inadequately managed competing interests.
Alleged manipulation of reviewer selection or editorial decisions.

8.2 Publication Ethics Complaints

Complaints may involve suspected plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, authorship disputes, citation manipulation, improper AI use, or other publication-integrity concerns.

These matters are handled in coordination with the journal's Publication Ethics and Research Misconduct policies.

8.3 Post-Publication Complaints

Concerns relating to published articles may include significant errors, unreliable findings, unethical research practices, inappropriate attribution, or disputed corrective notices.

Where warranted, the journal applies its Corrections and Retractions Policy.

8.4 Administrative and Journal Management Complaints

The journal also considers concerns regarding the clarity, accuracy, or consistent implementation of its published policies and administrative procedures.

Routine requests for manuscript status updates or technical assistance are normally handled as editorial correspondence rather than formal complaints.

9. How to Submit a Formal Complaint

Complaints should be submitted in writing through the official journal contact.

Email: [email protected]

Suggested Subject: Formal Complaint – JIEEd – [Relevant Manuscript or Article ID]

The complaint should include, where applicable:

The complainant's name and contact information.
The manuscript title, OJS submission ID, DOI, or article URL.
A clear description of the concern.
Relevant dates and circumstances.
Supporting documentation or verifiable evidence.
Details of previous communication with the journal.
The requested clarification or resolution, where appropriate.

Complaints should be made in good faith and supported by sufficiently specific information.

Anonymous Complaints

Anonymous concerns may be considered when they contain credible, specific, and independently verifiable evidence.

The journal may be unable to provide an individual response when the complainant cannot be contacted.

Anonymity does not automatically invalidate an allegation, but unsupported accusations may not justify further investigation.

10. Complaint Handling Procedure

JIEEd follows a structured and proportionate process for handling formal complaints.

Stage 1 — Receipt and Initial Review

The editorial office receives the complaint and determines its subject matter and relevance to the journal's responsibilities.

Stage 2 — Assessment of Evidence

The editor examines available information and determines whether the concern is sufficiently substantiated to require further evaluation.

Stage 3 — Identification of the Responsible Handler

An appropriate editor or independent representative is assigned to manage the complaint.

Individuals directly implicated in a complaint must not control the assessment or resolution of the complaint.

Stage 4 — Request for Clarification

Where appropriate, relevant parties are invited to explain the circumstances and provide supporting information.

Stage 5 — Investigation or Independent Consultation

The journal may review editorial records, consult independent experts, or refer matters to an appropriate institution or authority when necessary.

Stage 6 — Determination and Corrective Action

The journal evaluates the evidence and determines an appropriate response.

Stage 7 — Communication and Closure

The complainant is informed of the outcome to the extent permitted by confidentiality, privacy, and other relevant obligations.

The journal documents the actions taken and closes the case when the matter has been appropriately resolved.

11. Possible Outcomes of Complaints

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, JIEEd may take one or more of the following actions:

Provide clarification or an explanation of editorial procedures.
Correct inaccurate information or administrative errors.
Improve communication or internal editorial procedures.
Reassign a manuscript to an independent editor or reviewer.
Disregard or replace a compromised peer-review report.
Request additional information or an independent assessment.
Address inappropriate professional conduct.
Refer serious ethical concerns to an appropriate institution.
Initiate an appropriate correction, expression of concern, or retraction procedure.
Close the complaint when the available evidence does not substantiate the concern.

Corrective actions must be proportionate to the findings and consistent with the journal's established policies.

The journal does not automatically reverse editorial decisions merely because a complaint has been submitted.

12. Complaints Involving Editors or the Publisher

JIEEd recognizes the importance of independent assessment when a complaint concerns an individual with editorial authority.

12.1 Complaints Against a Handling Editor

When a complaint concerns a handling editor, the matter should be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or another uninvolved authorized editor.

The implicated editor must not determine the outcome.

12.2 Complaints Against the Editor-in-Chief

When a complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the matter must be referred to an appropriate independent representative of the publisher or an uninvolved editor authorized to handle the concern.

The Editor-in-Chief must not investigate or decide a complaint concerning their own conduct.

Complainants should identify such correspondence as confidential and request referral to an independent publisher representative through the journal's official institutional contact arrangements.

12.3 Complaints Against the Publisher

Complaints involving the publisher should be referred to an appropriate institutional authority that is independent of the individuals concerned.

The journal and publisher must cooperate with legitimate inquiries while maintaining confidentiality and procedural fairness.

Where necessary, independent scholarly or research-integrity advice may be sought.

13. Research Misconduct and Serious Ethical Concerns

Complaints involving suspected research misconduct require procedures appropriate to their seriousness.

Such concerns may include:

Fabrication or falsification of research data.
Plagiarism or duplicate publication.
Manipulation of peer review.
Fraudulent authorship.
Citation manipulation.
Serious breaches of confidentiality.
Unauthorized disclosure of protected research data.
Unethical research involving children or other vulnerable participants.
Prohibited AI use in peer review or research reporting.

These matters are assessed under JIEEd's Research Misconduct Policy.

Where concerns involve the reliability of published research, the journal may also initiate procedures under its Corrections and Retractions Policy.

The journal distinguishes between its responsibility for editorial decisions and the responsibility of research institutions for investigating researcher conduct.

Allegations must not be treated as established misconduct before appropriate evaluation.

14. Confidentiality, Privacy, and Protection Against Retaliation

JIEEd handles appeals and complaints with appropriate confidentiality.

Information should be disclosed only to individuals who reasonably require access for assessment, investigation, institutional cooperation, or legal compliance.

The journal seeks to protect complainants, respondents, reviewers, and other parties from unnecessary disclosure.

Individuals who raise legitimate concerns in good faith must not be subjected to retaliatory editorial treatment within the journal's control.

Similarly, individuals whose conduct is questioned must be treated fairly and must not be publicly identified as responsible for misconduct without an appropriate evidentiary basis.

Confidentiality may be limited when disclosure is required by law, institutional procedures, or the need to protect research participants and the scholarly record.

Special attention must be given to complaints involving identifiable information about children or other vulnerable research participants.

15. Communication and Resolution Timeframes

JIEEd seeks to promptly acknowledge, evaluate, and resolve appeals and complaints without unnecessary delay.

The time required may depend on:

The complexity of the concern.
The availability and completeness of supporting evidence.
The need for an independent scientific assessment.
The responsiveness of the relevant parties.
The involvement of external institutions or authorities.

The journal does not guarantee a fixed resolution period for complex appeals or ethical investigations.

Where a matter requires extended examination, the editorial office should provide reasonable progress updates when appropriate.

All parties are expected to respond to legitimate requests for information within a reasonable period.

16. Professional Conduct and Misuse of Procedures

All appeals and complaints must be submitted respectfully and in good faith.

JIEEd does not tolerate harassment, intimidation, threats, discriminatory abuse, or deliberate manipulation of the complaints process.

The journal may limit repetitive, abusive, or demonstrably vexatious correspondence after appropriate consideration and documentation.

However, a communication must not be dismissed merely because it contains criticism of the journal or its editorial decisions.

Substantive and credible ethical concerns must receive appropriate consideration regardless of whether the complainant agrees with the journal's policies or decisions.

17. Records, Accountability, and Policy Review

JIEEd maintains appropriate records of appeals and complaints to support consistency, accountability, and editorial quality assurance.

Relevant records may include:

The original appeal or complaint.
Supporting evidence.
Related editorial correspondence.
Conflict-of-interest assessments.
Independent expert advice.
Editorial findings and decisions.
Corrective actions.
Final communications.

Records must be handled in accordance with applicable confidentiality and data-protection requirements.

The Editor-in-Chief oversees the consistent implementation of this policy, except in matters requiring independent handling because of a conflict of interest.

The publisher supports appropriate oversight while respecting editorial independence.

JIEEd periodically reviews its appeals and complaints procedures to strengthen transparency, fairness, and compliance with scholarly publishing standards.

18. Official Contact and Related Policies

Submitting an Appeal or Complaint

Journal of Integrated Elementary Education (JIEEd)

Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training
Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo Semarang, Indonesia

Editorial Email: [email protected]

Official Contact: https://journal.walisongo.ac.id/index.php/jieed/about/contact

Journal Website: https://journal.walisongo.ac.id/index.php/jieed

Appeals and Complaints