SAGA provides a formal channel through which concerns regarding editorial or publishing activities may be submitted and assessed.

The complaints and appeals process is intended to:

• Provide stakeholders with an accessible means of raising legitimate concerns;
• Ensure that complaints are assessed fairly and without inappropriate bias;
• Allow authors to request reconsideration of editorial decisions where justified;
• Support accountability and consistency in editorial and publishing practices;
• Provide reasoned responses and appropriate resolution where possible.

Submission of a complaint or appeal does not guarantee that the original editorial decision will be changed.

Complaints may concern matters relating to the journal's editorial administration, publishing procedures, or professional conduct.

Examples include:

• Alleged procedural irregularities in editorial handling;
• Concerns about unfair treatment or inappropriate editorial conduct;
• Failure to follow a relevant published journal policy;
• Concerns regarding communication, administrative handling, or unreasonable procedural delays;
• Alleged conflicts of interest affecting editorial handling;
• Concerns regarding transparency or accountability in journal operations.

Allegations of research misconduct, plagiarism, data fabrication, or other publication integrity violations are assessed under the journal's Publication Ethics Policy.

Matters concerning published article corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions are governed by the journal's Correction and Retraction Policy.

Complaints should be submitted in writing to the journal's official editorial email address:

saga@mediadigitalpublikasi.com

To facilitate an appropriate assessment, complainants are encouraged to provide the following information:

• Full name and contact information of the complainant;
• Manuscript ID, article title, DOI, or other relevant reference, where applicable;
• A clear description of the concern or complaint;
• Relevant dates, communications, or supporting documentation;
• The specific issue requiring clarification or reconsideration;
• The resolution or action requested, where appropriate.

Complaints should be submitted in good faith and supported by relevant information whenever possible.

Anonymous complaints may be considered when sufficient verifiable information is provided, although anonymity may limit the journal's ability to investigate or communicate the outcome.

Authors may request reconsideration of an editorial decision when they believe that a material procedural error, factual misunderstanding, or relevant evaluative oversight has occurred.

An appeal should clearly identify the grounds for reconsideration and provide supporting reasons or evidence.

Grounds that may warrant consideration include:

• A significant factual error affecting the editorial assessment;
• A material procedural irregularity in manuscript handling;
• Evidence of a relevant undisclosed conflict of interest;
• A substantial misunderstanding of the manuscript's methods, findings, or contribution.

Mere disagreement with reviewer comments or an unfavorable editorial decision does not, by itself, establish grounds for overturning the decision.

Where justified, the journal may arrange an additional editorial assessment or independent review of the disputed matter.

An appeal does not automatically reopen a rejected submission or guarantee acceptance for publication.

Complaints and appeals are handled through a proportionate assessment process appropriate to the nature and seriousness of the concern.

The process generally involves the following stages:

• Receipt and Acknowledgment: The editorial office receives the complaint or appeal and acknowledges receipt within a reasonable period.
• Initial Assessment: The concern is reviewed to determine its relevance, supporting information, and appropriate handling route.
• Clarification and Review: Additional information may be requested from the complainant or other relevant parties when necessary.
• Impartial Evaluation: The matter is considered by an appropriately responsible person who is not subject to a relevant conflict of interest.
• Decision and Response: The journal communicates its conclusion and provides an appropriate explanation, subject to confidentiality requirements.

Complex matters may require additional time, supporting evidence, or consultation with relevant parties.

The journal aims to avoid unnecessary delays and to keep complainants informed when substantial additional review is required.

Complaints and appeals must be considered fairly and without inappropriate influence from personal, institutional, financial, or professional interests.

An individual whose conduct or decision is the subject of a complaint should not act as the sole decision-maker in resolving that complaint.

Where a relevant conflict of interest exists, responsibility for assessing the matter should be assigned to another suitably qualified and impartial person.

Complaints involving the Editor-in-Chief may be referred to an appropriate independent editorial representative or to the publisher for coordination of an impartial assessment.

The publisher's involvement in coordinating such a review does not replace independent scholarly judgment on editorial matters.

Following assessment, the journal will determine an appropriate response based on the available information and the applicable journal policies.

Possible outcomes include:

• Providing clarification or an explanation of the relevant editorial procedure;
• Confirming that the original decision or procedure was appropriate;
• Correcting an identified administrative or procedural error;
• Reconsidering an editorial decision where sufficient grounds exist;
• Referring the matter to the appropriate journal policy or responsible authority;
• Implementing proportionate improvements to editorial or administrative procedures.

The journal will communicate the outcome to the complainant when contact information is available and disclosure is appropriate.

Explanations may be limited where confidential reviewer information, personal data, or other protected information is involved.

SAGA treats complaints and appeals with appropriate confidentiality.

Information provided during the process is shared only with persons who reasonably need access for assessment, resolution, or compliance with applicable obligations.

The journal may maintain appropriate records of complaints, relevant correspondence, assessments, and outcomes for accountability and procedural consistency.

Complainants should not be subjected to retaliation or unfavorable editorial treatment solely for raising a legitimate concern in good faith.

The journal also expects all participants to communicate professionally and to avoid knowingly false, abusive, or malicious allegations.

If a complainant believes that a material procedural concern remains unresolved, they may submit a reasoned request for further consideration.

Such requests should identify the specific unresolved issue and any relevant new information.

Further consideration may be undertaken by an appropriately authorized and impartial person, where warranted.

Repeated submissions that provide no material new information may be closed after an appropriate explanation has been provided.

This policy does not prevent stakeholders from seeking advice or using other legitimate channels available to them.

Complaints and editorial appeals should be submitted through the journal's official contact channel.

Please include "Complaint" or "Editorial Appeal" in the email subject line, as appropriate.

• Editorial Governance and Independence
• Peer Review Process
• Publication Ethics
• Correction and Retraction