Complaints & Appeals Policy

Complaints and Appeals Policy

Frontiers in Education and Technology is committed to handling complaints and appeals fairly, objectively, confidentially and promptly. Complaints and appeals will be considered without discrimination or retaliation.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, readers, editors, editorial board members and other individuals or organisations affected by the journal’s editorial or publishing activities.

1. Scope

This policy covers:

  • Appeals against editorial decisions.

  • Complaints about the peer-review process.

  • Complaints about editorial procedures or unreasonable delays.

  • Complaints about the conduct of editors, reviewers or journal staff.

  • Concerns about published articles.

  • Allegations of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification or other research misconduct.

  • Authorship and contributorship disputes.

  • Undisclosed competing interests.

  • Citation or peer-review manipulation.

  • Concerns about corrections, retractions or expressions of concern.

  • Complaints regarding fees, waivers, licensing or copyright.

  • Complaints about discrimination, confidentiality or inappropriate communication.

Routine questions about manuscript status, submission formatting or publication schedules should be directed to the Editorial Office and are not normally treated as formal complaints.

2. General Principles

All complaints and appeals will be handled according to the following principles:

  • Fairness and impartiality.

  • Appropriate confidentiality.

  • Timely acknowledgment and review.

  • Opportunity for affected parties to respond.

  • Decisions based on available evidence.

  • Proportionate and transparent outcomes.

  • Recusal of individuals with relevant competing interests.

  • Protection of the integrity of the scholarly record.

  • No retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith.

Submitting a complaint or appeal does not guarantee that the original decision will be changed.

3. How to Submit a Complaint

Formal complaints should be submitted by email to:

Editorial Office: journals@gf-press.com

The subject line should state:

Formal Complaint – [ARTICLE TITLE OR MANUSCRIPT ID]

The complaint should include:

  • The complainant’s full name and contact information.

  • The relevant manuscript number, article title or Digital Object Identifier.

  • A clear description of the issue.

  • The date or approximate date of the relevant event.

  • The names or roles of individuals involved, where known.

  • Supporting documents, correspondence, links or evidence.

  • The outcome or action requested.

  • Any relevant competing interest of the complainant.

Anonymous complaints may be considered when they contain sufficient specific and verifiable evidence. The journal may be unable to investigate vague or unsupported anonymous allegations.

4. Initial Assessment

The Editorial Office will normally acknowledge receipt of a formal complaint within five working days.

The complaint will undergo an initial assessment to determine:

  • Whether it falls within the journal’s responsibility.

  • Whether sufficient information has been provided.

  • Whether immediate action is required.

  • Whether the matter involves research misconduct.

  • Whether any editor or staff member has a competing interest.

  • Whether the matter should be referred to another institution, publisher, ethics body or legal authority.

The journal may request additional information before beginning a full review.

Complaints that are abusive, threatening, discriminatory, clearly frivolous or repeatedly submitted without new evidence may be closed without further investigation. Legitimate criticism will not be treated as abusive merely because it is strongly expressed.

5. Handling of Complaints

A complaint will be assigned to an editor or senior staff member who was not directly involved in the matter and who has no relevant competing interest.

The person handling the complaint may:

  • Review editorial records and correspondence.

  • Examine reviewer reports and decision letters.

  • Request information from authors, reviewers or editors.

  • Seek advice from independent experts.

  • Consult relevant publication-ethics guidance.

  • Contact an institution, funder or ethics committee where appropriate.

  • Recommend corrective or disciplinary action.

Affected individuals will normally be given a fair opportunity to respond to material allegations before a final outcome is reached.

The journal will aim to provide a reasoned response within 30 calendar days of receiving all necessary information. Complex cases may require more time. If the review cannot be completed within 30 days, the complainant will be informed that the matter remains under consideration.

6. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may appeal a decision where they believe that a material error in procedure, fact or interpretation affected the outcome.

An appeal should not be based only on disagreement with the reviewers or dissatisfaction with the decision.

Valid grounds for appeal may include:

  • A significant factual misunderstanding.

  • A material procedural error.

  • Evidence that a reviewer lacked relevant expertise.

  • Evidence of an undisclosed competing interest.

  • Evidence of bias or discriminatory treatment.

  • Failure to consider important information contained in the manuscript or response.

  • A decision that appears inconsistent with the journal’s published policies.

  • A serious error in the interpretation of the study’s methods, findings or scope.

An appeal must be submitted within 30 calendar days of the editorial decision.

7. How to Submit an Appeal

Appeals should be emailed to:

Editorial Office: journals@gf-press.com

The subject line should state:

Editorial Appeal – [MANUSCRIPT ID]

The appeal must include:

  • The manuscript title and identification number.

  • The date and type of the original decision.

  • A concise explanation of the grounds for appeal.

  • Identification of the alleged factual, procedural or interpretive error.

  • Supporting evidence.

  • A point-by-point response to the relevant editorial or reviewer comments, where appropriate.

  • A statement confirming that the appeal has been approved by all authors.

Authors should not submit a revised manuscript as part of an appeal unless requested by the journal.

Only one appeal will normally be considered for each editorial decision.

8. Review of Editorial Appeals

Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief or a suitably qualified senior editor who:

  • Was not directly responsible for the original decision.

  • Has no relevant competing interest.

  • Has appropriate subject or editorial expertise.

The appeal reviewer may examine:

  • The submitted manuscript.

  • Reviewer reports.

  • Author responses.

  • Editorial correspondence.

  • The original decision.

  • Additional evidence submitted with the appeal.

The journal may obtain an additional independent review where necessary. An additional review does not automatically result in reconsideration or acceptance.

Possible appeal outcomes include:

  • The original decision is upheld.

  • The manuscript is returned to editorial consideration.

  • An additional independent review is obtained.

  • The authors are invited to submit a revised manuscript.

  • A procedural error is corrected.

  • The original decision is replaced by a new decision.

The outcome of the appeal will be communicated in writing with a brief explanation.

The decision following the formal appeal is normally final.

9. Appeals Concerning Rejection Without External Review

A manuscript rejected during initial editorial assessment may be appealed only where the author can show that:

  • The manuscript was incorrectly judged to be outside the journal’s scope.

  • The decision relied on a material factual error.

  • A significant procedural irregularity occurred.

  • A relevant competing interest or bias may have affected the decision.

An appeal is not likely to succeed where the manuscript was rejected because of insufficient originality, limited contribution, poor methodological quality, inadequate preparation or failure to follow the journal’s submission requirements, unless the author demonstrates a clear error.

10. Complaints About Peer Review

Complaints concerning peer review may involve:

  • Inappropriate or unprofessional reviewer comments.

  • Unreasonable delay.

  • Breach of confidentiality.

  • Reviewer bias or competing interests.

  • Requests for irrelevant citations.

  • Suspected use of confidential material.

  • Suspected use of generative AI in violation of journal policy.

  • Possible manipulation of reviewer identities or reports.

The journal will not disclose reviewer identities in a double-anonymous peer-review process unless disclosure is required by law or is necessary for a formal misconduct investigation.

Where reviewer misconduct is substantiated, the journal may:

  • Disregard the review.

  • Obtain a replacement review.

  • Remove the reviewer from the journal’s reviewer database.

  • Notify the reviewer’s institution where appropriate.

  • Correct the editorial record.

  • Reconsider the manuscript where the misconduct affected the decision.

11. Complaints About Editors or Editorial Board Members

A complaint concerning an editor or editorial board member will not be handled by the person who is the subject of the complaint.

If the complaint concerns a handling editor, it will normally be referred to the Editor-in-Chief.

If the complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief, it will be referred to:

  • An independent senior editorial board member; or

  • The publisher’s designated research-integrity representative.

The individual handling the complaint must have had no material involvement in the disputed matter and must disclose any relevant competing interest.

12. Complaints About the Publisher

Complaints concerning the conduct, ownership, fees, services or business practices of Global Frontiers Press Limited should be submitted through the journal’s official contact address.

Editorial decisions will not be reconsidered by the publisher for commercial reasons. The publisher must respect the editorial independence of the Editor-in-Chief and editorial board.

If a publisher-level complaint also concerns an editorial decision, the editorial and business aspects will be considered separately.

13. Research Misconduct Complaints

Allegations involving plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, unethical research, manipulated images, authorship abuse, citation manipulation, undisclosed conflicts, paper mills or peer-review manipulation will be handled under the journal’s Research Misconduct and Ethical Guidelines.

The journal may:

  • Request an explanation and supporting records.

  • Consult independent experts.

  • Contact the authors’ institution.

  • Contact an ethics committee or funder.

  • Inform another journal or publisher.

  • Suspend editorial consideration.

  • Reject the manuscript.

  • Publish a correction.

  • Issue an Expression of Concern.

  • Retract the article.

The journal does not determine institutional or legal guilt. Where an investigation requires access to information beyond the journal’s authority, the matter may be referred to the appropriate institution or body.

14. Authorship Disputes

The journal cannot independently determine who qualifies for authorship where the parties disagree about contributions.

For authorship complaints, the journal may request:

  • Contribution statements.

  • Written agreement from all authors.

  • Relevant project records.

  • A determination from the authors’ institution.

Editorial consideration or publication may be suspended while an authorship dispute is unresolved.

Where an authorship error is confirmed after publication, the journal may publish a correction. Where authorship was obtained through serious misconduct, further action may be taken.

15. Complaints About Published Content

Concerns about a published article will be evaluated according to their seriousness and potential effect on the scholarly record.

Possible outcomes include:

  • No further action.

  • Clarification from the authors.

  • Publication of a reader comment or author response.

  • Correction.

  • Addendum.

  • Expression of Concern.

  • Retraction.

  • Removal in exceptional legal or safety circumstances.

The original article will normally remain part of the scholarly record and will be linked to any relevant notice.

16. Complaints About Article Processing Charges

Complaints about Article Processing Charges, invoices, waivers or discounts will be handled separately from editorial decisions.

The ability or inability of an author to pay must not influence peer review or acceptance.

Authors should identify:

  • The manuscript number.

  • The disputed charge.

  • Any relevant invoice or correspondence.

  • The published fee or waiver information relied upon.

  • The requested resolution.

Financial complaints will not be disclosed to reviewers and should not be considered by editors when evaluating scholarly merit.

17. Confidentiality

Complaints and appeals will be handled confidentially as far as reasonably possible.

Information may be shared with:

  • Editors responsible for reviewing the matter.

  • Independent experts.

  • Authors, reviewers or staff whose response is necessary.

  • Relevant institutions, funders or ethics committees.

  • Legal or regulatory authorities where required.

The journal cannot guarantee absolute confidentiality where disclosure is necessary for a fair investigation, legal compliance or protection of the scholarly record.

18. Competing Interests and Recusal

Anyone handling a complaint or appeal must disclose relevant competing interests.

A person must recuse themselves where they:

  • Were involved in the original decision or conduct.

  • Have a personal or professional relationship with a party.

  • Work at the same institution as an affected party.

  • Have a financial or intellectual interest in the outcome.

  • Cannot evaluate the matter impartially.

The case will then be reassigned to an independent person with suitable expertise.

19. Protection Against Retaliation

The journal will not disadvantage an author, reviewer, reader or complainant for raising a concern or submitting an appeal in good faith.

Knowingly false allegations, deliberate harassment, threats or attempts to misuse the complaints process may result in the communication being closed and, where necessary, referred to an appropriate institution or authority.

An allegation that is not substantiated is not necessarily malicious. Good-faith concerns will be assessed according to the available evidence.

20. Records and Outcomes

The journal will maintain appropriate records of formal complaints and appeals, including:

  • The information received.

  • The individuals involved in reviewing the matter.

  • Relevant competing-interest declarations.

  • Evidence considered.

  • Correspondence with affected parties.

  • The decision and reasons.

  • Any corrective action taken.

Records will be retained in accordance with applicable data-protection, legal and research-integrity requirements.

21. External Review

Where the complainant believes that the journal has not followed its published procedure, the complainant may request a final procedural review.

A final procedural review considers whether:

  • The complaint or appeal was handled under the published policy.

  • A relevant competing interest was managed.

  • Material evidence was considered.

  • The process was fair.

It does not normally repeat the full academic evaluation of the manuscript.

Where an appropriate external publication-ethics or regulatory body has jurisdiction, the complainant may seek further guidance from that body after completing the journal’s internal process.

22. Contact

All formal complaints and appeals should be sent to:

Frontiers in Education and Technology Editorial Office
Email: journals@gf-press.com
Publisher: Global Frontiers Press Limited
Address: Room 313, 3/F, 143 Wai Yip Street, Kwun Tong, Hong Kong S.A.R., China

 

Related policies: All Policies · Author Guidelines & Submission · Open Access · APC & Waivers

Contact: journals@gf-press.com