Complaints & Appeals

An author who believes a rejection or revision decision resulted from a misunderstanding of the manuscript, a factual error in a review, or a procedural problem may submit a written appeal to the editorial office, explaining the specific grounds. General disagreement with a reviewer’s scientific judgment, on its own, is not grounds for appeal — the same review standard applies to every submission.

Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or a handling editor who was not involved in the original decision. The outcome may uphold the original decision, request an additional independent review, or reverse the decision. The exact target timeline for a response has not yet been finalized; authors receive acknowledgment of a submitted appeal promptly.

Concerns about the conduct of an editor, reviewer, or another author — rather than a scientific disagreement — can be raised confidentially with the editorial office. This includes concerns about a possible breach of the journal’s double-anonymized review confidentiality.

Complaints and appeals are handled discreetly. Raising a concern does not affect the handling of an author’s other or future submissions.