Complaints & Appeals
Concerns Are Heard, Evidence Matters
Authors and other relevant parties should have an appropriate way to raise concerns about publishing or editorial decisions. This policy distinguishes between editorial disagreement, procedural concerns, publishing complaints, research integrity concerns, technical issues, and formal appeals — outcomes are not guaranteed and depend on the evidence and circumstances.
Complaint or Appeal?
Complaint
A concern about:
- Publishing process
- Editorial conduct
- Peer review
- Communication
- Publishing administration
- Research integrity
Appeal
A request to reconsider an eligible editorial decision based on substantive grounds.
Not every complaint is an appeal, and not every disagreement provides grounds for an appeal.
What Happens After You Submit
This is a general process — not every complaint necessarily follows exactly the same path, and no specific timeframe is promised.
1. What This Policy Covers
This policy provides a route for raising concerns about PenScholar’s publishing and editorial processes — including editorial decisions, peer review concerns, publication processes, authorship disputes, conflicts of interest, publishing errors, research integrity concerns, journal administration, and access or metadata problems. Not every disagreement constitutes grounds for an appeal.
2. Who Can Submit, and Types of Complaints
Authors, reviewers, editors, readers, researchers, and other relevant stakeholders can raise a complaint that relates meaningfully to PenScholar’s publishing activities. Unnecessary personal information is not required.
- Editorial Process — concerns about how a manuscript was handled
- Peer Review — concerns about reviewer conduct, confidentiality, conflicts, or procedural issues
- Publishing Process — concerns about publication, metadata, production, or communication
- Authorship — concerns involving authorship or contribution
- Research Integrity — concerns about possible plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or other integrity issues
- Published Articles — concerns about errors or reliability of published research
3. Editorial Appeals
An appeal may be appropriate when an author believes an editorial decision was based on a significant misunderstanding, procedural problem, or material issue that can be meaningfully addressed — for example, relevant evidence was overlooked, a significant factual misunderstanding occurred, a material procedural issue affected the decision, or new information directly relevant to the decision has become available. An appeal does not guarantee that the original decision will be reversed.
What Can Be Appealed
Where appropriate: manuscript rejection, editorial decisions, peer review concerns, publication decisions, and certain post-publication editorial actions.
What Cannot Usually Be Appealed
A preference for a different editorial outcome, disagreement with scholarly judgment without substantive grounds, repeated appeals that provide no new information, or requests to bypass journal policies do not, on their own, provide sufficient grounds. The goal is to protect editorial independence while allowing legitimate concerns to be heard.
4. Submitting a Complaint or Appeal
An appeal should clearly identify the manuscript or article title, manuscript ID where applicable, journal, the original decision, the reason for the appeal, relevant evidence, and any new information. A useful complaint generally includes your role in relation to the matter, the journal name, article or manuscript title, DOI or manuscript ID where available, a description of the concern, relevant dates, supporting documentation where appropriate, and the clarification or action requested.
Supporting Evidence
Relevant evidence may include the published article, manuscript correspondence, review comments, data or documentation, citation evidence, or relevant editorial communication. Please avoid publicly exposing private correspondence.
Submit a Complaint Submit an Appeal
5. Review and Assessment
PenScholar may review the submitted information, check relevant records, consult appropriate editorial personnel, request clarification, contact relevant parties, consider additional evidence, and determine whether further action is appropriate. Complaints and appeals are handled with appropriate attention to conflicts of interest — where possible, a matter is not assessed solely by someone whose direct conflict could affect the review.
6. Confidentiality
PenScholar handles complaints and appeals with appropriate discretion. Information may need to be shared with relevant parties when necessary to assess or resolve a concern — absolute confidentiality or complete anonymity is not guaranteed. Personal information submitted through a complaint or appeal is handled according to PenScholar’s Privacy Policy, and only necessary personal data is collected.
7. Research Integrity Concerns
Research integrity issues — such as fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, authorship manipulation, data manipulation, ethical approval concerns, or misleading figures — are distinct from ordinary editorial appeals and may require a different assessment process. An allegation alone does not establish that misconduct has occurred.
8. Published Article Concerns
A concern about an already published article may require a correction, an Expression of Concern, a retraction, editorial clarification, or further assessment. No particular outcome is promised in advance.
9. Possible Outcomes
Depending on the facts, possible outcomes may include clarification, reconsideration, further editorial assessment, a correction, an editorial note, an Expression of Concern, a retraction, or no change to the original decision. The outcome depends on the evidence and applicable policy.
Protecting Editorial Independence
This process provides a fair route for concerns without undermining legitimate editorial judgment. The existence of an appeal mechanism does not mean every editorial decision must be reversed.
10. Repeated or Bad-Faith Complaints
PenScholar may limit repeated submissions that repeat previously resolved matters without new information, contain harassment or threats, are clearly unrelated to publishing activities, or are submitted in bad faith.
11. Responsibilities
Authors Raising an Appeal Should
- Provide accurate information
- Explain the grounds clearly
- Provide relevant evidence
- Avoid personal attacks
- Cooperate with reasonable requests for clarification
Reviewer Concerns
Reviewers may raise concerns about confidentiality, conflicts of interest, peer review procedures, ethical concerns, or editorial conduct. See Peer Review Policy.
Reader Concerns
Readers should provide specific article information, a clear explanation, evidence where available, and relevant documentation — responsible reporting is encouraged rather than public accusation.