Complaints should be made to the Editor-in-Chief or the managing editor responsible for the journal and/or the Editor who handled the paper. If no publishing contact is identified send the query to (email@example.com). The below procedure applies to appeals to editorial decisions and complaints about failure in handling papers such as long delays in handling papers and complaints about publication ethics.
Complaint about scientific content, e.g. an appeal against rejection
The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor - the person responsible for deciding whether the article should be published - considers the authors’ argument, the reviewer reports and decides whether
- The decision to reject should stand;
- Another independent opinion is required
- The appeal should be considered.
The complainant is notified of the decision and given an explanation. Appeals are final, and new submissions take precedence.
Complaint about processes, e.g. time taken to review
The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Handling Editor (if applicable) and/or in-house contact (if applicable), will look into the situation. The complainant will receive prompt and appropriate response. Process and procedure improvements are made possible through the dissemination of feedback to relevant stakeholders.
Complaint about publication ethics, e.g., researcher's author's, or reviewer's conduct
The Editor-in-Chief or the Handling Editor conforms to the standards set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). On particularly difficult or complicated cases, the Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor may seek advice from the publisher through their in-house contact. Complainants are given feedback by the Editor in Chief or Handling Editor, who decides on a course of action and informs them of it. If the complainant is still dissatisfied with the way their complaint has been handled, he or she may take the matter up with the Committee on Publication Ethics.