If you believe that errors in the decision process, if corrected, will lead the Editor to consider a revision, you may wish to avail yourself of the journal’s appeals process. Please do not abuse it! The appeals process is designed as an alternative procedure to ensure authors are treated fairly. Availing yourself of this process does not guarantee that the final decision regarding your paper will change.
- Cooling-Off Period: You cannot appeal a decision until at least two weeks after you have received a decision on your paper. Until the two-week period has ended, the Editor will not accept or respond to any communication about your paper. It often takes time to think unemotionally about why your manuscript was rejected. If you have a legitimate grievance, it will remain legitimate two weeks later.
- Appeals Fee: Appeals require the payment of a fee of $700. The fee for submitting an appeal has been set to several times the regular submission fee because these requests put a tremendous strain on editorial resources. An appealer is asking for a more through and detailed manuscript review. Since the goal is to try to correct possible mistakes rather than to make new ones, a tremendous time commitment is involved.
- Appeals Format: Your appeal should include a formal letter describing what errors you think have occurred and why you believe their resolution should change the Editor’s decision. The letter must be clear, concrete, and concise. Please ensure your letter of appeal does not contain identifying information (author names, affiliations) so that the letter may be sent to reviewers.
- Submitting an Appeal: To submit an appeal, click Submit a Paper and follow the steps. On Step 2, you will be asked to specify the submission type; specify your submission as an appeal here. Please do not send appeals directly to an Editor. All Editors have been asked to funnel all appeals through the formal process. This helps to ensure that all authors are treated as equally as possible.
- Appeals Process: Once your appeal has been received, the Executive Editor will read over the existing file and your letter. The Executive Editor will either manage the appeal directly or appoint an appeal editor. Authors are welcome to suggest an Editor, but the assignment will depend on several factors, including editorial workloads, expertise, and conflicts of interest. At this point the Editor will come to one of two decisions:
- Reject the appeal: If, in the Editor’s view, a further review of the paper will not change the ultimate outcome, the process ends here. You will receive back an explanation (potentially brief) of why the Editor believes that further consideration is unlikely to be productive.
- Proceed with the appeal: If the Editor believes the appeal should go forward, two new referees will examine your paper. The first referee will receive the paper as if it is a de novo submission. This referee will not receive any information about the paper’s history. A second referee will be selected to examine the entire file. The report from this second referee may be very brief, especially if the second referee believes that the initial review came to the right conclusion. The Editor will then send a decision regarding the appeal. This decision is final.
- Refund: If the initial decision on your paper is changed to a revise-and-resubmit or acceptance, RFS will refund 100% of the appeal fee.
- If the Editor has decided to terminate the editorial process after receiving an appeal and you are unhappy with the decision, you can write to the Executive Editor. While your complaint will be noted, the Editor’s decision will not be overruled. If you are unhappy with the Executive Editor, you should write to the President of the Society of Financial Studies.
- You are entitled to no more than two unsuccessful appeals every four years. No exceptions!
Appeals Process Outcomes
Data represents December 12, 2005 through January 16, 2019
There have been 214 appeals. Of those, 2 are under review as of January 16, 2019. We update the statistics on this page twice yearly.
- Accepted for eventual publication: 28
- Rejected: 173
- Return for revision: 10
- Withdrawn 1