Editorial appeal
Address the decision reasoning and identify a material point the editor may have overlooked.
Fair review and escalation
Complaints and Appeals
A complaint or appeal should receive a documented, proportionate, and conflict-aware response. The process separates disagreement with an outcome from a credible concern about procedure, ethics, conduct, policy application, or the accuracy of the scholarly record.
journal complaints and appeals policy
1Decision appeals2Process complaints3Ethics escalation4Independent review
01
Choose the Route That Matches the Concern
An appeal asks the journal to reconsider a decision because of a specific factual, procedural, or interpretive issue. A complaint may concern conduct, delay, confidentiality, conflicts, policy, accessibility, privacy, or another aspect of journal operation.
The message should identify the record, explain the concern clearly, and provide relevant evidence. Repeated messages, personal attacks, or pressure do not strengthen a case.
Key routes
Use the Journal With Confidence
Each route connects to the record or policy needed for the next decision.
Ethics complaint
Provide specific evidence about authorship, conflicts, data, plagiarism, conduct, or record integrity.
Operational complaint
Describe the access, privacy, communication, fee, or service problem and the remedy requested.
02
Review, Recusal, and Outcome
The journal should acknowledge the matter, assess jurisdiction, preserve relevant records, and assign it to a person without a disqualifying conflict. Complex cases may require additional information or independent input.
The outcome should explain what was reviewed, the decision, any action taken, and whether a further escalation route exists. Confidential information may limit what can be shared publicly.
- Identify the manuscript, article, issue, decision, or policy involved.
- State the specific factual or procedural concern.
- Provide evidence and the outcome you seek.
- Disclose related correspondence or institutional action.
- Allow the documented process to run without public harassment.
Common questions
Questions Readers and Contributors Ask
Is disagreement with reviewers enough for an appeal?
Not by itself. An appeal is stronger when it identifies a material error, policy departure, conflict, or overlooked evidence.
Can the same editor review a complaint about their own conduct?
A conflict-aware process should use another qualified person or independent review where appropriate.
Will every complaint be public?
No. Privacy, confidentiality, fairness, and legal considerations may require a private process, while any change to the scholarly record should be made visible.
Sources
Standards and Further Reading
These external resources provide additional policy or practice context. The journal’s own published policies govern its workflow.
Present a Focused, Evidence-Based Concern
Name the record, explain the issue, attach only relevant evidence, and state the remedy you are requesting.