Complaints Policy of the NAJFNR
This statement applies about the policies, our procedures and actions about the complaints received to NAJFNR. We welcome the complaints and try to do our best to fix any issue and solve the matters to the entire satisfaction of our authors. We welcome any type of query or our complaints at the same time. However, we would like to inform our authors and readers to read carefully and understand the instructions to the authors and the policy of our journal.
Our Understanding about Complaints
The meaning of complaint we understand is any type of unhappiness or dissatisfaction regarding the publication and policies of the journal;
The complaint may be due to the long delay in publication or a replies related to the author;
The complaint may also be about the decision of the editorial board member or the editor in chief regarding the manuscripts of the author;
The complaints may be about the rude responses or a misjudgment of the editorial board member too.
Complaints at The NAJFNR are resolved through a process of response and escalation:
• Wherever possible complaints will be dealt with by the relevant member of the editorial staff, escalating to the Co-Editor if required.
• In the case that this initial response is insufficient, the complainant can request for the complaint to be escalated to Associate Section-Editors.
• If the complainant remains unhappy, complaints should be escalated to the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision is final.
NAJFNR is aware about the following types of complaints:
- Complaints from the author.
- Complaints about plagiarism.
- Duplicate publication or submitting the article to various journal at the same time.
- Research results misappropriations.
- Complaints regarding the research errors and fraud.
- Violations of research standards.
- Conflicts of interest.
- Bias behavior of reviewers.
Our Managing-Editor, staff and Editor-in-Chief will take a prompt action on every complaint, irrespective of the authors, academicians or our readers and make their full efforts to solve and satisfy the person to their entire satisfaction. It should be underlined that we do not consider every statement is a complaint but if it a healthy criticism, we thanks the person and try to improve our systems.
Policy for Handling Complaints
If the journal receives any complaints which infringes intellectual property rights or contains material, inaccuracies or unlawful material, the journal will immediately paying full attention, investigate about the various aspects of the complaint and try to solve and satisfy the complaints. Our journal staff and editors make their full efforts to improve the quality of the journal and minimize the mistakes to zero. However, we still accept that occasionally mistakes may occur.
- Investigation may include a request that the parties involved substantiate their claims.
- The NAJFNR will make a good faith determination whether to remove the allegedly wrongful material.
- A decision not to remove material should represent the Journal's belief that the complaint is without sufficient foundation, or if well‐founded, that a legal defense or exemption may apply, such as fair use in the case of copyright infringement or truthfulness of a statement in the case of libel.
- Journal should document its investigation and decision.
- We strive to ensure that all of articles published in NAJFNR are of the highest quality and are free from errors. However, we accept that occasionally mistakes might happen.
- Although, as we have started earlier, that we invite queries and entertain complaints for the continuous improvements of the journal quality and for the entire satisfaction of the authors and readers.
- We take minimum time (maximum two weeks) to solve the complaints of dissatisfaction.
- Sometimes, if there is a complaint from some other author that the present author by its actions or statements, harming the intellectual copyrights, we make arrangement for the discussion of both the parties to discuss & make the matter clear.
How to make a Complaint?
The complaints of the authors and readers should be sent to the editor in chief as soon as possible on the email via; email@example.com. You are also welcome to discuss about your complaint on the mobile number of the chief editor which is (+213) 551152261.
The procedure outlined below aims to be fair to those making complaints and those complained about. All complaints will be acknowledged (within three working days if by email). If possible a definitive response will be made within two weeks. If this is not possible an interim response will be given within two weeks. Interim responses will be provided until the complaint is finally resolved.
If the complainant remains unhappy, complaints should be escalated to the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision is final.
All article published in NAJFNR contain are double-blind peer-reviewed. Our publication ethics and publication malpractice statement is mainly based on the Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011)
The NAJFNR is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes seriously publication malpractice and conflicts of interest. Personal, financial and professional affiliations or relationships can be perceived as conflicts of interest. All authors and all members of NAJFNR’ Editorial Boards are required to disclose any actual and potential conflicts of interest at submission or upon accepting an editorial or review assignment.
The NAJFNR review process is designed to guarantee transparent and objective editorial and review process, and because handling Editor and reviewers' names are made public upon the publication of articles, conflicts of interest will be openly apparent.
As an author, disclosure of any potential conflict of interest should be done during the submission process. Consider the following questions and make sure you disclose any positive answers. If you failed to disclose any of the potential conflict of interest below during submission, please contact the NAJFNR Editorial Office with the details as soon as possible:
- Did you or your institution at any time receive payment or services from a third party for any aspect of the submitted work?
- Do you have financial relationships with entities that could be perceived to influence, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing, what you wrote in the submitted work?
- Do you have any patents and copyrights, whether pending, issued, licensed and/or receiving royalties related to the research?
- Do you have other relationships or activities that readers could perceive to have influenced, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing, what you wrote in the submitted work?
How to appeal an editorial decision
If you desire to appeal a journal editor’s decision, please submit an appeal letter to the journal’s online editorial office (firstname.lastname@example.org). Please address this to the editor and explain clearly the basis for an appeal.
Provide details why you disagree with the decision. Please provide specific responses to any of the editor’s and/or reviewers’ comments that contributed to the reject decision.
Provide any new information or data that you would like the journal to take into consideration.
Provide evidence if you believe a reviewer has made technical errors in the assessment of your manuscript.
Include evidence if you believe a reviewer may have a conflict of interest.
After receiving the appeal, editors may involve any associate/section who handled the peer review of the original submission depending on the nature of the appeal. Editors may confirm their decision to reject the manuscript, invite a revised manuscript, or seek additional peer- or statistical review of the original manuscript.