Complaints and Appeals
Editorial PRAXIS · Institutional accountability
Listening, review and reasoned responses
Editorial PRAXIS provides a procedure for complaints about editorial conduct and requests to reconsider decisions. Each communication will be assessed on its merits, with respectful treatment, documented handling and management of possible competing interests.
01 · SCOPE OF THE PROCEDURE
Matters that may be raised
- Complaints: communication difficulties, unexplained delays, inappropriate treatment, procedural failures or other matters concerning editorial management.
- Appeals: substantiated requests to reconsider a decision concerning a proposal, manuscript, chapter or work.
- Suggestions: proposals to improve service, procedures or accessibility.
Possible scholarly misconduct will be addressed under the publication ethics and integrity policy. Personal information requests will be handled through the privacy procedure.
02 · SUBMITTING A COMMUNICATION
Required information
Requests should be sent to the institutional email address with sufficient information to identify and assess the matter:
- The sender's name and contact details.
- The work's title and submission identifier, where applicable.
- A specific account of the facts and relevant dates.
- Supporting documents or correspondence.
- The action or response requested from the publisher.
Present the information clearly and avoid unnecessary sensitive information. If essential details are missing, the sender will be asked to provide them before a substantive response is issued.
03 · RECONSIDERATION OF DECISIONS
Grounds for an appeal
An appeal must identify the disputed decision and explain why it warrants review. Grounds may include verifiable errors, relevant information not considered, competing interests or departures from the announced procedure.
Challenges to scholarly assessments must address their arguments with evidence or specific reasoning. Disagreement with the outcome alone does not require the decision to be changed.
Requests should be submitted promptly to facilitate examination of the record. Receipt does not overturn the original decision or imply acceptance. The publisher will communicate whether any processing should remain suspended while the appeal is considered.
04 · HANDLING THE CASE
How the matter is examined
- Recording and acknowledgement. The communication will be documented and its receipt acknowledged.
- Initial assessment. The nature of the matter, available information and an appropriate person to handle it will be identified.
- Examination of the record. Relevant files, correspondence and documents will be reviewed. Clarification may be requested from those involved.
- Independent consultation. An additional editorial or specialist assessment will be sought where necessary.
- Response and documentation. The conclusion, reasons and relevant actions will be communicated.
05 · INDEPENDENCE AND TREATMENT
Impartial handling and information protection
A person whose conduct is the subject of a complaint will not decide that case alone. Appeals must include review by someone without a competing interest in the matter. Where editorial leadership is involved, an alternative handler will be appointed and independent advice sought as necessary.
Information will be shared only with those who need to participate. Anyone affected by an allegation will have an opportunity to respond to relevant facts, while protecting third-party confidentiality.
Raising a concern in good faith must not prejudice assessment of the sender's other works. Communications will receive respectful consideration, without treating an allegation as proof of a breach.
06 · OUTCOMES AND FOLLOW-UP
Responses and corrective action
Examination may result in clarification, procedural correction, reassessment, modification of a decision or maintenance of the original decision with an explanation of its grounds.
Where corrective action is determined, the publisher will identify how its completion will be communicated. Reassessment does not guarantee a favourable outcome or acceptance for publication.
If the sender considers that the response omitted a relevant issue, they may identify it and provide new information. Where intervention by an external institution or authority is appropriate, the need for it and the scope of the publisher's role will be explained.
INSTITUTIONAL CONTACT
Timelines and communication channel
When acknowledging receipt, the publisher will explain the next steps and an anticipated response timeframe according to the complexity of the case. If documents, consultations or an extension are required, the reasons will be explained and an update provided.
Use one of these subject lines: Complaint · Editorial PRAXIS, Appeal · Editorial PRAXIS or Suggestion · Editorial PRAXIS.
