Complaints & Appeals

Complaints, Appeals & Post-Publication Discussions

 

Akhasia: Jurnal Akuntansi Syariah • STEI Permata Bojonegoro • COPE Scientific Debate Standards

Akhasia: Jurnal Akuntansi Syariah, published by STEI Permata Bojonegoro in official collaboration with CV Jeoja Word Indonesia, recognizes that scholarly discourse does not conclude with article publication. Rigorous intellectual critique, methodological replication, and constructive scientific debate are vital catalysts for advancement in Islamic accounting, Sharia auditing, taxation, and financial governance research. The journal provides transparent, ethical mechanisms for scholarly exchange and procedural grievances in compliance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Channels for Post-Publication Discussion

1. Letters to the Editor / Commentaries

Researchers and readers may submit formal academic commentaries evaluating the conceptual framework, econometric methodology, or Sharia compliance interpretations of an article published in Akhasia. Submissions must be objective and evidence-based.

2. Author Response & Rebuttal

When an analytical commentary is accepted, the original authors will be invited to submit a formal rebuttal. Both the critique and the authors' response will be reviewed and published concurrently in the subsequent issue.

3. Direct Author Correspondence

Readers seeking technical clarification on statistical accounting models (e.g., PLS-SEM, panel regression, event studies), survey metrics, or empirical dataset access may correspond directly with the corresponding author via the email published in the article metadata.

Criteria for Submitting Academic Critiques

  • Timeliness: The commentary must address an article published in Akhasia within the preceding 24 months.
  • Tone & Objectivity: Must maintain a professional, respectful scholarly tone. Ad hominem criticisms, personal attacks, or unsubstantiated claims will be rejected immediately.
  • Length & References: Typically between 1,000–1,500 words with a focused list of up to 10 primary literature references.
  • Peer Review: Commentaries and author responses undergo editorial review and peer appraisal prior to publication.

Editorial Appeals and Grievances

Authors who believe a rejection decision resulted from a factual misunderstanding of their research methodology, statistical calculations, or reviewer bias may submit an appeal to the Editor-in-Chief. The appeal must outline specific, documented factual arguments. Valid appeals are assigned to an independent senior editor who was not involved in the original decision.

How to Submit a Comment or Appeal

Interested scholars wishing to contribute to post-publication discussions or submit an appeal should email the editorial office with supporting documentation:

Email: [email protected]
Subject Line: [Post-Publication Discussion / Appeal] – Article Title & DOI