The text below describes how EES deals with complaints and concerns raised, and how authors can appeal to an editorial decision.
Nature of complaints considered:
Complaints may relate to a failure of process (e.g. delays) or a severe misjudgement (e.g. an improperly applied retraction notice). They may also relate to author or reviewer misconduct. Complaints may be made by anyone, including authors, reviewers and readers.
All complaints must be within the scope of the Rules and Regulations governing EES, and must be related only to the content, policies or processes of the journal. EES will not consider complaints where the complainant simply disagrees with a decision taken by the Editorial team (see appeals process below).
Process for making a complaint
Complaints should be emailed to insee.ees[at]gmail.com. Please provide as much detail as possible and include supporting information where appropriate (for example, copies of email correspondence).
If your complaint relates to a specific article, please include the title and DOI if it is already published and the manuscript ID number if it is unpublished (with copies of system generated email acknowledgement to the receipt of submission).
Process for handling the complaints
A formal acknowledgement of the complaint will be made within five working days. Every attempt will be made to provide a full response within four weeks. Otherwise, regular interim communications will be made, at least once in every four weeks.
Complaints will be dealt with by the journal office wherever possible, with reference to EES policies and guidelines, but will be escalated to the Corresponding Editor where necessary. The Corresponding Editor has the right to consult the other Editors or with any third party over the issue, and make a final decision. That final decision shall be binding, and the matter shall be deemed closed.
Where a complaint is made about an Editor, it will be independently investigated by one or the other two Editors. All complaints against the Editors be referred to INSEE President, in her/his role as Secretary, Advisory Board and then, be referred to Advisory Board or INSEE Executive Committee as s/he deems appropriate. The purpose of the investigation is to establish that (a) the correct procedures have been followed in line with the guidelines and policies including Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement, (b) decisions have been reached based on academic criteria and (c) personal prejudice or bias has not influenced the outcome.
4 Complaints or concerns about author or reviewer misconduct
If you wish to complain or raise a concern about suspected author or reviewer misconduct, please refer to our Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement for more detail about our processes for dealing with allegations and the kind of evidence we might require. The process for raising these complaints and concerns is the same as above.
Concerns may include, but are not limited to:
Suspicion of an ethical problem with a manuscript (including undeclared conflicts of interest, false ethical declarations, use of identifiable images without consent or use of copyright images without permission)
Suspicion of unethical image manipulation in a published article
Suspected manipulation of the publication process (including practices such as duplicate publication, self-plagiarism, salami-slicing or excessive self-citation)
We take allegations of misconduct very seriously and will investigate following established best practices in publication ethics.
Complaints about advertising
If you are unhappy about an advertisement you have seen in EES we recommend contacting the advertiser directly. If there is no response you can contact Advertising Standards Council of India.
You are also welcome to contact us through insee.ees[at]gmail.com. Generally, this will result in one of four outcomes:
A. We may confirm that the advertising complies with Principles & Guidelines of the Advertising Standards Council of India that we follow and does not require any change.
B. We may ask the advertiser to revise the advertisement.
C. We may refuse to display advertising for the product in future.
D. We may escalate the complaint to the advertiser or the ASCI.
If your complaint is not satisfactorily resolved:
If you do not feel your complaint has been addressed, you may wish to refer it further.
INSEE: Complaints against editors may be referred to the President of INSEE, the Society owning the journal through insee.ees[at]gmail.com with a copy to insee[at]iegindia.org. Please note, however that EES and INSEE abide by a strict policy of editorial independence. Complaints about editorial matters (rejections, retractions, appeals etc.) will be referred back to the Editors, whose decisions on such matters is final.
We will consider appeals against the editorial decision only under highly specific circumstances and usually only where a clear breach of policy can be demonstrated or author can indicate a clear misunderstanding of the article by the reviewer.
7.1 Rejected manuscripts
The most common reasons for rejecting manuscripts are:
The article content is not within the scope of the journal;
The article is not written in clear and intelligible English;
The article does not conform to our Guidelines for Authors in terms of content, style and/or formatting.
The article does not meet the journal's quality as per recommendations of reviewers and decision of the editor.
In the last three instances, articles are normally reopened to authors to allow changes to be made within a 8 week window. Failure to meet this deadline will result in automatic rejection of the manuscript.
We will not consider appeals against the Editor's decision under any of these circumstances.
It is the author's responsibility to provide the correct contact details, to monitor correspondence from our office, to respond promptly using the correct email address, and to comply with our requirements. Where a manuscript has been rejected because authors have failed to meet the revision deadline, a new submission is possible.
7.2 Rejection of revised articles
Revised articles will not usually be rejected provided they conform to our guidelines for revised versions. We will not consider appeals against the editorial decision to reject a revised article if it does not meet our requirements.
Authors whose manuscript has been rejected on other grounds may follow the appeals process if they wish to make an appeal, but note that Editors are unlikely to reverse their original decision unless significant new information is supplied or it can be demonstrated that our processes were at fault.
7.3 Retracted articles
Editors do not take the decision to retract articles lightly and will usually have conducted an extensive investigation before doing so. We will only consider appeals against retractions if substantial evidence can be provided to demonstrate that the decision was unjust.
7.3 Appeals process
Any appeals against the editorial decision must be made by email to insee.ees[at]gmail.com with a copy to insee[at]iegindia.org addressed to the Publisher within two weeks of the decision. You will need to provide a detailed explanation of why you disagree with the decision and include supporting information. You should also include the article title and DOI if you are appealing a decision to retract a published article and the manuscript ID number you are appealing a decision to reject an unpublished manuscript.
We will acknowledge receipt of your appeal within five working days and it will be passed to the Editors for consideration. Wherever possible, the appeal will be considered by an Editor who was not involved in the original decision. The handling Editor will make a recommendation to either reject the appeal, request further information or uphold the appeal. We aim to resolve all appeals within four weeks. The editorial decision on these matters is final and we will not consider further appeals on the same grounds.
Adapted from, MedEdPublish, "Complaints and Appeals".