Scope

This policy applies to complaints and appeals concerning:

• editorial conduct or communication;
• reviewer conduct;
• journal staff conduct, including delay, unresponsiveness, misuse of privileged information, or breaches of confidentiality;
• procedural fairness in manuscript handling;
• delay or administrative concerns;
• conflicts of interest;
• publication ethics handling;
• corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or editorial notices; and
• editorial decisions, where an appeal is permitted under this policy.

Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

An author may appeal an editorial decision where the author believes that the decision involved a material error of fact, a material misunderstanding of the manuscript, a significant procedural irregularity, a failure to consider relevant evidence, or a serious concern regarding fairness in editorial handling. An appeal must be based on substantive grounds and not on mere disagreement with the journal’s academic judgment.

Appeals should be submitted in writing within 30 days of the decision unless the journal permits otherwise in exceptional circumstances. The appeal should identify the manuscript, state the grounds clearly, and explain why the decision should be reconsidered.

An appeal will normally be considered by an editor who was not materially involved in the original decision, or by the Editor-in-Chief where appropriate. The journal may uphold the original decision, invite further editorial consideration, obtain an additional review, or take another proportionate step considered appropriate. The outcome of the appeal will be communicated with reasons. The journal reserves the right to treat the appeal decision as final.

Complaints

Complaints may be raised about the conduct of the journal, editors, reviewers, board members, journal staff, publisher, or processes. This includes, for example, alleged confidentiality breaches, misuse of privileged information, undeclared conflicts of interest, serious unresponsiveness, or other procedural or professional concerns. The journal will consider complaints respectfully and without retaliation.

How to Submit

Complaints and appeals should normally be submitted in writing to editorbjbm.gcbs@rub.edu.bt.

The submission should include:

• the manuscript or article title and reference number where relevant;
• a clear explanation of the concern;
• any supporting evidence or documentation; and
• the remedy or outcome sought, where appropriate.

Alternative Contact and Escalation Route

If the complaint or appeal concerns the Editor-in-Chief, another editor, a reviewer, or journal staff, or if the complainant reasonably believes that the normal contact route is conflicted, the matter should instead be sent to the College Research Committee (CRC) at crc.gcbs@rub.edu.bt. The CRC may coordinate a conflict-free handling route, designate an appropriate alternative decision-maker, or recommend that the matter be considered under the journal’s Research Integrity and Ethical Oversight policy, Corrections and Retractions policy, or another relevant procedure.

Initial Handling

The journal will acknowledge receipt within seven working days and will assess whether the matter falls within the journal’s remit. The journal may ask for clarification or additional information. In serious, high-risk, institutionally sensitive, or legally sensitive matters, the journal may seek independent expert advice, institutional input, or legal advice before deciding how to proceed.

Decision-Making and Conflicts

Complaints and appeals will be reviewed by an editor or journal representative not materially conflicted in the matter. Where the Editor-in-Chief is directly involved, or where a complaint concerns an editor, reviewer, or journal staff member, the matter should be referred through the CRC to an appropriate alternative decision-maker or oversight route designated by the journal or publisher.

Possible Outcomes

Depending on the issue, the journal may:

• uphold the original decision;
• seek further editorial or reviewer input;
• reopen review;
• revise a decision;
• apologise and correct a process failure;
• take conduct-related action; or
• decline the complaint or appeal with reasons.

Limits of the Appeal Process

The journal’s primary role is to manage the editorial process fairly and, where necessary, correct the scholarly record. The journal is not an arbitration body for disputes that fall primarily within institutional, contractual, employment, disciplinary, funding, or legal jurisdiction, although it may refer such matters appropriately to institutions, employers, funders, or other competent bodies.

Abusive or Repetitive Correspondence

The journal will consider concerns in good faith, but abusive, threatening, defamatory, or repetitive vexatious correspondence may be managed proportionately and may not receive ongoing substantive response.

Appeals Distinguished from Misconduct Allegations

An appeal challenges an editorial decision on substantive or procedural grounds. An allegation of misconduct concerns potential research, publication, review, editorial, or staff misconduct and is handled under the journal’s Research Integrity and Ethical Oversight policy. Questions about corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or editorial notices are addressed under the journal’s Corrections and Post-Publication Review procedures. Where a submission raises both an appeal and a misconduct concern, the journal will separate or sequence the two processes as it considers appropriate.

Finality

The journal will designate a decision as final after reasonable review under this policy.