Complaints and Appeals
The journal is committed to providing authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders with a fair, transparent, accessible, and independent process for raising complaints and appealing editorial decisions.
Complaints and appeals will be considered respectfully, confidentially where appropriate, without discrimination or retaliation, and with due regard to editorial independence, conflicts of interest, and the integrity of the scientific record.
Complaints
A complaint may concern the journal’s editorial or publishing processes, including the conduct of editors or reviewers, unreasonable editorial delay, failure to follow the journal’s stated procedures, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, peer-review integrity, publication ethics, post-publication handling, or the conduct of persons acting on behalf of the journal.
Complaints should identify the manuscript, article, editorial process, or other matter concerned and should explain the issue as clearly as possible. Supporting documentation or evidence should be provided where available.
The journal may also consider anonymous complaints when they contain sufficiently specific and credible information to permit meaningful assessment. The identity of a complainant will be protected as far as reasonably possible, although absolute confidentiality cannot be guaranteed where disclosure is necessary for a fair investigation, an institutional procedure, an ethical obligation, or applicable law.
A complaint concerning suspected plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, authorship manipulation, peer-review manipulation, unethical research, data or image integrity, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other potential misconduct will be handled under the journal’s Research Misconduct and related ethics policies.
Handling Complaints
Complaints will normally be assessed first to determine their scope, seriousness, supporting evidence, and whether any conflict of interest exists.
Where the complaint concerns an editor, reviewer, or other person involved in the matter, that person must not control the assessment of the complaint. The matter will be assigned, where reasonably possible, to an independent editor or other appropriately qualified person who was not involved in the disputed conduct or decision.
If a complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief, it will be handled independently by a suitably qualified person or group that was not involved in the matter and has no relevant conflict of interest.
The journal may request further information from the complainant or other parties, review relevant editorial records, seek independent expert advice, or refer matters requiring formal investigation to an institution, ethics committee, research-integrity office, funder, publisher, or other competent body.
The journal will seek to provide a reasoned response within a reasonable period. Where an external investigation is required or relevant evidence is not yet available, the complainant may be informed that the matter remains under consideration.
Appeals of Editorial Decisions
Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant factual, procedural, scientific, or ethical issue materially affected the decision.
An appeal should clearly identify the disputed decision and provide a concise, evidence-based explanation of why reconsideration is justified. An appeal may, for example, identify a material factual error, a substantial misunderstanding of the manuscript, a relevant procedural irregularity, an unmanaged conflict of interest, or important information that was not adequately considered.
An appeal is not simply a request for another opinion because the author disagrees with a rejection. Differences in scientific judgment between authors, reviewers, and editors do not by themselves establish that an editorial decision was improper.
Appeals should address the substantive reasons given for the editorial decision and should not include personal criticism of editors or reviewers.
Review of Appeals
An appeal does not automatically result in renewed peer review or acceptance of the manuscript.
The journal will review the appeal together with the relevant manuscript, reviews, correspondence, and editorial records. Where appropriate, the journal may obtain additional independent scientific or methodological advice.
Whenever reasonably possible, an appeal should be reviewed by an editor who did not make the original disputed decision. If the original decision was made by the Editor-in-Chief, or if a relevant conflict of interest exists, the appeal will be assigned to an appropriately independent senior editor or other qualified person.
Following review, the journal may uphold the original decision, reconsider or modify the decision, obtain additional peer review, or restart part of the editorial process where a material procedural or integrity problem is established.
The outcome of the appeal will be communicated with an explanation. A completed appeal normally concludes the journal’s internal reconsideration of that editorial decision unless significant new evidence or a separate research-integrity concern subsequently emerges.
Complaints About Published Content
Concerns about a published article that may affect its accuracy, reliability, ethics, or integrity will not be treated merely as disagreements with an editorial decision.
Such concerns will be assessed under the journal’s policies on Research Misconduct, Editorial Actions, and Corrections and Retractions. Where appropriate, the journal may request evidence, seek responses from the authors, obtain independent expertise, or contact relevant institutions.
Legitimate scientific criticism and post-publication discussion will be distinguished from allegations of misconduct.
Independence and Fair Treatment
Editorial decisions will not be changed because of institutional status, personal influence, commercial pressure, threats, or other inappropriate considerations.
No author, reviewer, editor, Editorial Board member, institution, sponsor, or other party will receive preferential treatment in the complaints or appeals process.
A person who raises a concern in good faith must not be disadvantaged solely for having submitted a complaint or appeal.
Complaints or appeals that contain abusive language, threats, or repeated unsupported allegations may be managed in a manner necessary to protect staff and the integrity of the process, without preventing the journal from assessing any substantive and credible ethical concern contained in the communication.
The journal will maintain appropriate records of significant complaints, appeals, their handling, and outcomes in accordance with applicable confidentiality and record-retention requirements.