Appeals

Browse our ethics policies:

AI Usage Animals in research Attribution Authorship Citation manipulation Clinical trials Conflicts of interest Defamation/libel Editorial independence Fabricated data Appealing Image manipulation Informed consent Plagiarism Redundant publication Simultaneous submissions
 

Appeals policy

The Journal of Sustainable Decisions Intelligence and Optimization (JSDIO) recognizes that authors may occasionally wish to contest an editorial decision or raise concerns regarding the handling of their submission. The following guidance outlines the appropriate process for submitting an appeal or complaint.

Appealing an Editorial Decision

The journal upholds the principle of editorial independence and, as such, does not intervene in decisions made by editors unless there is credible evidence that the submission was not managed in accordance with established best practices. Editors retain full autonomy and authority to determine which manuscripts proceed to peer review and which are accepted or declined for publication, in line with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines on editorial freedom. Manuscripts rejected prior to peer review are not eligible for formal appeal.

For manuscripts rejected following peer review, appeals will be considered only under specific circumstances, such as:

  • The emergence of new evidence.
  • A decision that appears inconsistent with the journal's policies or procedures.
  • A demonstrable misunderstanding of the work by a reviewer.

Authors wishing to appeal must provide a detailed written explanation, including a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments. The process is as follows:

  1. Submit the appeal in writing to the Editor in Chief.
  2. The editorial team will review the appeal.
  3. Acknowledgment of receipt will be provided within 10 days, and the journal aims to resolve the matter within 60 days.
  4. The decision will be communicated in writing and will be final. Authors may not submit multiple appeals for the same manuscript. The journal will not arbitrate disputes based solely on differences of opinion regarding editorial judgment.

Complaints Regarding Editorial Management

If you have concerns about the handling of your submission or the editorial management of the journal—such as delays in decision-making or potential breaches of publication ethics—you should first contact the journal's Editor in Chief (contact details are available on the journal homepage). As part of the review process, the journal will examine the submission history and all relevant correspondence between the author, editor, and reviewers. Complaints regarding procedural failures should initially be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief or the handling editor.

All complaints will be treated with professionalism and respect, and we expect the same courtesy from authors. Abusive or harassing behavior toward journal staff or editorial teams will not be tolerated and may result in the complaint being dismissed.

The journal takes all complaints seriously and will provide an initial response within five working days of receipt. We aim to resolve complaints within six working weeks; if this is not possible, we will provide a clear explanation and timeline. (Please note that this timeframe does not apply to cases requiring post-publication notices.) Complainants will receive appropriate feedback, and relevant insights will be shared with journal stakeholders to improve processes and procedures. For more details, please refer to our Research Integrity Implementation Process.