Peer Academics separates two things that are often confused. An appeal asks the journal to reconsider an editorial decision on a manuscript. A complaint says that the journal, an editor, a reviewer, or the Publisher did something wrong — failed to follow its own policies, took too long, breached confidentiality, or behaved unprofessionally. They go to the same address but are handled differently, and neither can be used to obtain the other. Raising either one does not prejudice this or any future submission of yours, and the journal does not hold a complaint against an author.
Appealing an editorial decision
You may appeal once against any editorial decision, including a decline without external review. Write to [email protected], normally within four weeks of the decision letter, from the corresponding author's address and on behalf of all authors. Put "Appeal" and the manuscript number in the subject line, and include:
- the specific point or points you say were misunderstood or wrongly assessed, identified by reviewer and by paragraph;
- your reasoned answer to each, with the evidence — a passage in the manuscript, a source, an analysis, or a documented factual error in a report;
- anything you would change in the manuscript if the appeal succeeded.
Disagreement is not a ground of appeal. Neither is the importance of the topic, the effort the work took, the authors' standing, a deadline, or the fact that another journal thought better of it. An appeal that restates the manuscript's merits without engaging with the reasons given is closed with a short reply.
How an appeal is handled
The appeal is considered by the Editor-in-Chief or by an editor who took no part in the original decision. That editor may consult the original reviewers, seek a new reviewer, or decide on the file as it stands. The outcome is one of three: the decision is confirmed, and it is then final; the manuscript is reopened, usually for further review, with no commitment as to the eventual decision; or the manuscript is returned for resubmission as a new submission with the appeal's points addressed. You are told which, and why.
Appeals take no priority over new submissions and are normally decided within six weeks. While an appeal is open the manuscript is still under consideration at Peer Academics, so you must not submit it elsewhere; if you wish to do so, withdraw it first and receive confirmation of the withdrawal, as set out in Duplicate and Redundant Publication.
Complaints about process or conduct
Use this route for a manuscript that has sat without progress well beyond the periods in the Peer Review Policy; a failure to follow a published policy; a reviewer report that is abusive, discriminatory, or plainly not a review of your manuscript; a suspected breach of confidentiality or of anonymity; a suspected undeclared conflict of interest on the part of an editor or reviewer; a problem with the journal's website or submission system; or the conduct of anyone acting for the journal. Write to [email protected] with what happened, when, and the manuscript number if there is one.
Complaints about a published article's content — that it is wrong, unoriginal, or unethical — are not handled here. Use Corrections and Retractions or, where conduct is alleged, Misconduct Investigations. Requests about your personal data go to [email protected] and are handled under the Privacy Statement. Technical faults go to [email protected].
Who decides
- A complaint about an editor, a reviewer, or the handling of a manuscript is decided by the Editor-in-Chief, who obtains an account from the person concerned before deciding.
- A complaint about the Editor-in-Chief is referred to the Publisher, which considers the conduct of the office only. The Publisher does not reopen, review, or substitute a scholarly decision, and cannot direct one; see Editorial Independence.
- A complaint about the Publisher's administration of the journal — its funding, its infrastructure, or its staff — is decided by the Publisher's governing body.
- Anyone who is the subject of a complaint takes no part in deciding it, and anyone with a conflict of interest in the matter stands aside.
- While the Editorial Board is being assembled, the functions described on this page as the Editor-in-Chief's are exercised by the acting editorial management appointed by the Publisher, under the same rules; see Editorial Board.
Timelines
| Stage | Target period |
|---|---|
| Acknowledgment of an appeal or complaint | Five working days |
| Substantive reply to a complaint | Four weeks |
| Decision on an appeal | Six weeks |
| Reply where the matter is referred to an institution or requires an inquiry | Longer; you are told the expected period and kept informed |
These are the periods the journal sets itself to work to. They are not guarantees, and they are not averages measured from past performance. You are told if a matter will take materially longer.
What the journal will and will not do
Every appeal and complaint is recorded, with the evidence, the reasoning, and the outcome, and the file is retained in the journal's records for the periods set out in the Privacy Statement. You are told the outcome and the reasons for it in writing. Where the journal was at fault, it says so, states what it has done about it, and where the fault affected the published record, publishes a notice under Corrections and Retractions.
The journal will not identify a reviewer to you, before or after publication, whatever the complaint; where a reviewer has behaved improperly the editor deals with the reviewer and tells you that it has been dealt with. It will not give a second appeal on the same decision, and it will not continue an exchange that repeats points already answered — persistent or abusive correspondence is closed, with notice to you that it has been. Anonymous complaints about conduct are considered on their evidence alone, since an account that cannot be tested against the person accused rarely supports a finding.
If the journal's answer does not satisfy you, you may put the matter to the Publisher at [email protected], marked for the Publisher's attention, which is the last stage internally. Nothing on this page limits any right you have under Romanian law or under Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR).