Complaints and Appeals

Purpose

Islamic Sciences welcomes serious and properly supported concerns about its editorial process or published material.

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other interested parties may raise a complaint where they believe that an editorial, ethical, or procedural matter requires attention.

Authors may also appeal an editorial decision where there are substantial grounds for reconsideration.

Complaints

A complaint may concern matters such as:

  • Editorial conduct

  • Peer-review procedure

  • Plagiarism or duplicate publication

  • Authorship

  • Conflicts of interest

  • Research integrity

  • Citation or source concerns

  • Publication ethics

  • Errors in a published article

  • Inappropriate use of confidential information

  • Other matters affecting the integrity of the journal or scholarly record

A complaint should identify the article, manuscript, decision, or issue concerned and explain the basis of the concern as clearly as possible.

Where relevant, supporting evidence should be provided.

How Complaints Are Considered

The journal will first determine the nature of the complaint and whether it falls within the journal's responsibility.

The editorial team may review correspondence, manuscript records, reviewer reports, published material, relevant sources, or other information necessary to understand the matter.

The person against whom a substantial concern has been raised will normally be given an opportunity to respond where appropriate.

The journal may also seek advice from an editor, editorial board member, reviewer, or independent subject specialist.

Complaints Involving an Editor

A complaint concerning an editor should not be decided solely by the editor who is the subject of the complaint.

Where necessary, the matter should be referred to another appropriate member of the journal's editorial leadership or an independent academic adviser.

The same principle applies where the Editor-in-Chief or another senior editorial member has a direct conflict in the matter.

Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

An author may appeal a decision where there are reasonable grounds to believe that:

  • A significant aspect of the manuscript was misunderstood

  • A material factual or procedural error affected the decision

  • A relevant conflict of interest was not properly managed

  • Reviewer comments contain a demonstrable and consequential error

  • Important academic evidence justifies reconsideration

An appeal should explain the grounds for reconsideration rather than merely repeat arguments already considered during review.

Disagreement with an editor or reviewer does not by itself establish grounds for appeal.

Consideration of an Appeal

An appeal may be considered by the original editor, another editor, or an independent academic adviser depending on the circumstances.

The journal may:

  • Uphold the original decision

  • Seek clarification from the author

  • Obtain an additional review

  • Return the manuscript for further editorial consideration

  • Invite revision

  • Reverse or modify the original decision

Acceptance is not guaranteed because an appeal has been submitted.

The decision reached after reconsideration will normally conclude the journal's internal consideration of the same editorial matter unless significant new evidence later becomes available.

Complaints About Published Work

Concerns about a published article will be considered according to their seriousness.

Minor errors may require no action or a correction. More substantial concerns may require further investigation or a formal post-publication notice.

Where the reliability or ethical standing of an article is seriously questioned, the journal may act under its policy on corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions.

Fairness and Confidentiality

Complaints and appeals should be handled professionally and without retaliation.

Relevant correspondence and records may be treated confidentially, although information may need to be shared with authors, reviewers, institutions, specialists, or others where this is reasonably necessary to examine the issue.

Anonymous complaints may be considered where they provide sufficient evidence to examine a serious matter, although anonymity may limit the journal's ability to investigate some concerns.

Good-Faith Use of the Process

The complaints procedure is intended to address genuine academic and editorial concerns.

It should not be used to intimidate authors or reviewers, pursue personal disputes, pressure editors into changing academic judgments without reasonable grounds, or repeatedly reopen matters for which no new evidence has been provided.

At the same time, criticism of a published article or editorial decision will not be dismissed simply because it is uncomfortable or challenges an established position.

The journal's concern is whether the complaint raises a genuine issue requiring scholarly or editorial consideration.

Outcome

Where a complaint is substantiated, the journal will take action appropriate to the nature of the matter.

This may include clarification, further review, amendment of an editorial decision, correction of published material, an editorial notice, expression of concern, retraction, or another appropriate response.

Where the available evidence does not support the complaint, the journal may close the matter without further action.

Corrections, Retractions, Withdrawals and Post-Publication Policy

Purpose

Publication does not end the journal's responsibility for the scholarly record.

If an important error, omission, ethical concern, or question about the reliability of a published article becomes known, Islamic Sciences will consider what action is necessary to keep the record accurate.

Not every error requires formal correction. The response should reflect the seriousness of the problem and its effect on the article.

Corrections

A correction may be issued where a published article contains a significant error but the article's main argument or findings remain substantially reliable.

Examples may include errors in:

  • Author information

  • References

  • Quotations

  • Translations

  • Tables or figures

  • Dates

  • Data

  • Article metadata

  • A statement that materially affects the interpretation of part of the article

Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect meaning may be corrected without a separate formal notice where appropriate.

Substantive corrections should remain transparent and should not be used to conceal the history of the published record.

Author-Initiated Corrections

Authors who discover an important error after publication should inform the journal.

The editorial team will consider whether the matter requires a correction and whether the proposed amendment affects the interpretation or reliability of the article.

Authors should not regard correction as a penalty. Prompt acknowledgement of a genuine error is part of responsible scholarly practice.

Editorial Notes and Addenda

An editorial note or addendum may be used where additional information is needed to clarify a published article but a conventional correction is not the most appropriate form.

An addendum may, for example, provide information that became relevant after publication or clarify an issue that does not invalidate the original article.

Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be published where there is a serious question about an article but the available evidence is not yet sufficient to determine whether correction or retraction is required.

This may be appropriate where an investigation is incomplete, relevant information cannot yet be obtained, or an external institutional inquiry is underway.

An expression of concern is not a finding of misconduct. It alerts readers that an important question regarding the article remains unresolved.

Retractions

Retraction may be appropriate where a serious problem makes the article or a substantial part of its findings unreliable.

Reasons may include:

  • Major plagiarism

  • Fabrication or falsification

  • Seriously unreliable data or evidence

  • Duplicate publication

  • Manipulated peer review

  • Serious ethical violations

  • Fundamental errors that invalidate the principal conclusions

  • Unauthorized or seriously misleading use of material

  • Other misconduct that materially undermines the integrity of the publication

Retraction may also be appropriate in some cases where the underlying problem resulted from honest error rather than deliberate misconduct.

The purpose of retraction is to correct the scholarly record, not simply to punish an author.

Retraction Notices

Where an article is retracted, the journal should normally retain the article as part of the scholarly record while marking its status clearly.

A retraction notice should identify the article concerned and explain the principal reason for the retraction as clearly as circumstances reasonably allow.

The journal will avoid defamatory or unnecessary personal allegations and will distinguish established findings from unresolved claims.

Article Removal

Complete removal of a published article should be exceptional.

It may be considered where continued publication would create a serious legal problem, violate privacy in a manner that cannot reasonably be corrected, pose a significant safety concern, or involve circumstances in which continued public availability would itself be seriously harmful or unlawful.

Where possible, a record explaining that an article has been removed should remain available.

Withdrawal Before Publication

A submitted or accepted manuscript may be withdrawn before publication.

Authors requesting withdrawal should contact the journal and provide the manuscript details and reason for the request.

Where there are multiple authors, the journal may ask for confirmation that all authors are aware of or agree with the withdrawal.

The editorial office may also discontinue or withdraw a manuscript from consideration where, for example:

  • Duplicate submission is discovered

  • An unresolved authorship dispute arises

  • Serious ethical concerns are identified

  • Required information is not provided

  • Authors fail to respond to important editorial queries

  • The integrity of the submission cannot reasonably be established

Withdrawal before publication should not be confused with retraction of an article that has already entered the scholarly record.

Changes to Authorship After Publication

Requests to change authorship after publication require particular care.

The journal may ask for an explanation and written agreement from the affected authors.

Where an authorship correction is justified, the published record and relevant metadata may be updated together with an appropriate notice.

Authorship changes will not be made simply to accommodate honorary, guest, or other inappropriate authorship.

Post-Publication Discussion

Scholarly disagreement with an article is not in itself grounds for correction or retraction.

Readers may challenge an author's interpretation, reasoning, methodology, sources, or conclusions through legitimate academic criticism.

Editorial action becomes necessary where the concern relates to the accuracy, integrity, ethics, or reliability of the published record rather than merely to a difference of scholarly opinion.

Investigation of Concerns

Where a significant post-publication concern is raised, the journal may:

  • Examine the published article and relevant sources

  • Contact the author for clarification

  • Consult reviewers or editorial board members

  • Seek independent specialist advice

  • Request underlying evidence where appropriate

  • Contact an institution where a serious matter falls within its responsibility

Actions should be proportionate to the issue under consideration.

Updating Article Records

Where a correction, retraction, or other formal notice is issued, the journal should update the relevant online article record and metadata where reasonably possible.

The relationship between the original article and the subsequent notice should be clear to readers.

Protecting the Scholarly Record

Islamic Sciences does not regard the published record as incapable of correction.

Errors can occur even in carefully reviewed scholarship. What matters is that significant errors and ethical concerns are addressed openly and in a manner proportionate to their effect on the work.

The journal therefore seeks to preserve both the permanence of the scholarly record and its capacity for responsible correction.