Complaints About Scientific Content (Editorial Decisions)

Complaints about scientific content include appeals or concerns related to editorial decisions, such as manuscript rejection. Editors have broad discretion in determining whether a submission is suitable for the scope, quality standards, and editorial priorities of the journal. Many manuscripts may be declined without external peer review and are accompanied by a general statement of the editorial decision. Such decisions are not normally eligible for formal appeal.

If an author believes that a rejection decision was not made in accordance with the journal’s stated policies and procedures, the author may submit an appeal to the Editor-in-Chief at bel@standoutpress.org. Appeals must include a clear, detailed, and point-by-point response addressing the comments provided by reviewers and/or editors.

The Editor-in-Chief will review:

1. The peer review process undertaken for the submission;
2. The reviewer reports;
3. The author’s appeal and supporting arguments.

Based on this review, the Editor-in-Chief will decide whether:

1. The original decision should stand;
2. An additional independent opinion is required;
3. The appeal should be reconsidered.

Decisions on appeals are final. New manuscript submissions will take priority over appeals.

Complaints About Editorial and Review Processes

Complaints about processes include concerns related to editorial handling, such as delays in peer review or publication timelines. The Editor-in-Chief will investigate the matter and provide appropriate feedback to the complainant. Where relevant, feedback will also be shared internally with editors and stakeholders to support continuous improvement of editorial processes and procedures.

Complaints About Publication Ethics

Complaints about publication ethics include concerns related to potential misconduct by authors, reviewers, or editors. This may include, but is not limited to, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, conflicts of interest, or unethical peer review practices.

The Editor-in-Chief will assess the complaint and may consult the publisher or in-house ethics advisors in complex or sensitive cases. A course of action will be determined, and feedback will be provided to the complainant. If the complainant remains dissatisfied with how the issue has been handled, the complaint may be escalated to the publisher for further consideration.

Principles for Handling Complaints and Appeals

Bulletin of Education and Language adheres to the following principles when investigating complaints and appeals:

• 1. Fairness: All parties will be treated fairly and impartially. Conflicts of interest will be avoided.
• 2. Confidentiality: Information will be disclosed only as necessary to resolve the complaint.
• 3. Clarity: Communication will be clear, transparent, and appropriate to the nature of the complaint.
• 4. Timeliness: Complaints will be handled as promptly as possible, recognizing that complex cases may require additional time to ensure a fair and thorough investigation.

Submission and Acknowledgement of Complaints

All complaints and appeals should be submitted via email to bel@standoutpress.org. Receipt of complaints and appeals will be acknowledged within one week. The Editor-in-Chief will conduct investigations in accordance with COPE guidelines, ensuring that procedures are followed correctly and that concerns are assessed fairly, objectively, and without prejudice.

Reference to Ethical Guidance

For further guidance on handling complaints, appeals, and publication ethics, Bulletin of Education and Language follows the recommendations provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics.

COPE: https://publicationethics.org/facilitation-and-integrity-subcommittee