Appeals & Complaints

ETERNAL — English, Teaching, Learning and Research is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, consistent, and accountable editorial and peer-review process. The journal recognizes the rights of authors, reviewers, editors, and other stakeholders to raise legitimate concerns about editorial decisions, peer review, publication procedures, research integrity, or other aspects of journal management.

ETERNAL handles appeals and complaints independently, fairly, and confidentially, in accordance with the journal's editorial policies and applicable principles of publication ethics.

1. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that the decision was based on a significant misunderstanding of the manuscript, a substantial factual error, an inappropriate interpretation of the research, or a demonstrable problem in the review or editorial process.

An appeal should not be based solely on disagreement with the reviewers' academic judgment. The fact that authors disagree with reviewers' comments does not, by itself, constitute grounds for an appeal.

Valid grounds for an appeal may include:

  • a reviewer or editor has misunderstood a central aspect of the manuscript;
  • a significant factual or methodological error has affected the evaluation;
  • important information or evidence in the manuscript was overlooked;
  • the manuscript was assessed using criteria that were inconsistent with the journal's stated policies;
  • there is evidence of a conflict of interest or other procedural irregularity that may have affected the decision; or
  • there has been a substantial error in the editorial or peer-review process.

2. How to Submit an Appeal

Appeals should be submitted by the corresponding author in writing through the journal's official communication channel.

An appeal should include:

  1. the manuscript title and manuscript identification number;
  2. the corresponding author's name and contact information;
  3. the editorial decision being appealed;
  4. a clear and concise explanation of the grounds for the appeal;
  5. specific responses to the relevant reviewer or editorial comments; and
  6. any additional evidence or clarification that supports the appeal.

Authors should distinguish clearly between points of factual or procedural error and legitimate differences in scholarly interpretation.

Appeals should normally be submitted within 30 days of the editorial decision. Appeals submitted after this period may be considered at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief, particularly when there are reasonable circumstances explaining the delay.

3. Appeal Review

Appeals are initially assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated senior editor who was not directly responsible for the original decision, where practicable.

The editor may:

  • uphold the original decision;
  • request further clarification from the authors;
  • seek an additional independent editorial or peer assessment;
  • reconsider the manuscript when a substantive error is identified; or
  • take other appropriate action based on the circumstances.

Where necessary, an additional reviewer may be invited to assess the specific issue raised in the appeal. The additional reviewer should have no relevant conflict of interest.

An appeal does not automatically suspend or reverse the original editorial decision.

The decision following an appeal is normally final. ETERNAL will not ordinarily consider repeated appeals concerning the same decision unless substantial new evidence or a previously unidentified procedural issue is presented.

4. Complaints

Complaints may concern matters other than the scientific judgment of a particular editorial decision. ETERNAL accepts complaints relating to, for example:

  • unreasonable or unexplained delays in editorial or publication processes;
  • inappropriate editorial or peer-review conduct;
  • breaches of reviewer or author confidentiality;
  • conflicts of interest;
  • suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabrication, falsification, or other forms of publication misconduct;
  • authorship or contributorship disputes;
  • inappropriate use or disclosure of artificial intelligence;
  • concerns regarding research ethics or ethical approval;
  • copyright or licensing matters;
  • errors in published articles or journal metadata;
  • inappropriate communication or professional conduct; or
  • other concerns about the journal's editorial or publishing practices.

Complaints should provide sufficient information and supporting evidence to enable the journal to investigate the matter appropriately.

5. Confidentiality and Fair Treatment

ETERNAL handles appeals and complaints as confidentially as reasonably possible. Information will be shared only with individuals who need it to investigate and resolve the matter.

The journal will make reasonable efforts to protect authors, reviewers, editors, and other parties from unnecessary disclosure of confidential information.

Individuals involved in an appeal or complaint should disclose any relevant conflict of interest. Where a person is directly involved in the matter being investigated, the journal may assign another editor or appropriate independent person to handle the case.

ETERNAL does not tolerate retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith.

6. Complaints Concerning Editors or the Editor-in-Chief

When a complaint concerns an editor who would normally handle the matter, the complaint will be referred to another appropriate editor or senior editorial representative where possible.

Complaints concerning the Editor-in-Chief will be handled by an appropriate senior representative of the journal's publisher or editorial oversight structure, where applicable.

The person responsible for handling a complaint should be independent of the specific matter whenever reasonably possible.

7. Research Integrity and Publication Misconduct

When an appeal or complaint raises concerns about possible research or publication misconduct, ETERNAL may initiate an appropriate investigation.

Depending on the nature of the concern, the journal may:

  • request clarification or documentation from the authors;
  • consult reviewers, editors, or independent experts;
  • contact the authors' affiliated institution;
  • request information concerning research ethics approval or participant consent;
  • issue a correction or other post-publication notice where appropriate; or
  • take other measures necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Serious allegations of misconduct may require institutional investigation. ETERNAL may refer such matters to the relevant institution or other appropriate authority when necessary.

Further procedures are described in the journal's Publication Ethics, Publishing Malpractice, Research Ethics, and Corrections & Retractions policies.

8. Post-Publication Concerns

Concerns about an article that has already been published may be raised with the journal at any time.

ETERNAL takes post-publication concerns seriously because the integrity of the published scholarly record remains important after publication.

Depending on the nature and significance of the issue, the journal may publish:

  • a correction;
  • an erratum;
  • a clarification;
  • an expression of concern; or
  • a retraction.

The appropriate action will depend on the evidence available and the nature of the concern.

9. Good-Faith Submissions

Appeals and complaints should be submitted in good faith and should provide specific, relevant, and verifiable information where possible.

The journal will not consider abusive, threatening, defamatory, discriminatory, or demonstrably frivolous communications as legitimate grounds for an appeal or complaint.

However, disagreement with an editorial decision or scholarly criticism of the journal will not, by itself, be regarded as abusive or inappropriate.

10. No Guarantee of a Change in Decision

Submitting an appeal does not guarantee that the original decision will be changed. An appeal is intended to provide an opportunity to identify and correct substantive errors or procedural problems, not to provide authors with an additional round of peer review simply because they are dissatisfied with the outcome.

Editorial decisions remain based on the manuscript's scholarly quality, originality, methodological rigor, significance, ethical compliance, relevance to the journal's scope, and overall contribution.

11. Contact

Appeals and complaints should be directed through the journal's official editorial contact channel. The communication should clearly indicate whether it concerns an Editorial Appeal, Publication Complaint, Research Integrity Concern, or Post-Publication Concern.

ETERNAL aims to acknowledge legitimate appeals and complaints promptly and to resolve them in a fair, evidence-based, and transparent manner.

The journal may update this policy periodically to reflect developments in scholarly publishing standards and publication ethics.