You may submit an appeal here.
The appeals process is designed as an alternative procedure to ensure authors are treated fairly. 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 appeals process. Availing yourself of this process does not guarantee that the final decision will change.
DO NOT email your appeal to the editor. Editors have been asked to funnel all appeals through the formal process to ensure that all authors are treated as equally as possible.
You must wait 2 weeks post-decision before submitting an appeal. This period is required to allow time to think about the decision. It often takes time to think unemotionally about why your manuscript was rejected.
Appeals should be submitted within a reasonable time after the decision has been made, and definitely not after more than a year.
You must include the $700 appeal fee. The fee for submitting an appeal is higher than a regular submission fee because these requests put a tremendous strain on editorial resources. An appealer is asking for a more thorough and detailed review. Since the goal is to correct possible mistakes, a tremendous time commitment is involved.
You must include a formal letter describing what errors you think have occurred and why you believe their resolution should change the decision.
Appeals should be submitted within a reasonable time after the decision has been made, and definitely not after more than a year.
You must include the $700 appeal fee. The fee for submitting an appeal is higher than a regular submission fee because these requests put a tremendous strain on editorial resources. An appealer is asking for a more thorough and detailed review. Since the goal is to correct possible mistakes, a tremendous time commitment is involved.
You must include a formal letter describing what errors you think have occurred and why you believe their resolution should change the decision.
Your letter must be anonymous (no author names, affiliations, etc.) so it may be shared with reviewers.
In your letter, you must indicate whether you would like the same editor to handle the appeal or whether you would prefer another editor. If you would prefer another editor, you may suggest your preference. The executive editor will take suggestions into account, but will not always able to accommodate them due to editorial workloads, expertise, and conflicts of interest.
In your letter, you must indicate whether you would like the same editor to handle the appeal or whether you would prefer another editor. If you would prefer another editor, you may suggest your preference. The executive editor will take suggestions into account, but will not always able to accommodate them due to editorial workloads, expertise, and conflicts of interest.
The executive editor will look over the existing file and your letter and decide whether to manage the appeal directly or appoint an editor.
If, in the editor’s view, a further review of the paper will not change the outcome, the editor will reject the appeal. You will receive an explanation (potentially brief) of why the editor believes further consideration is unlikely to be productive.
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 examine the entire file. The report from this second referee may be brief, especially if the second referee believes the initial review came to the right conclusion. The editor will consider the referee recommendations and then issue a decision regarding the appeal. This decision is final.
If, in the editor’s view, a further review of the paper will not change the outcome, the editor will reject the appeal. You will receive an explanation (potentially brief) of why the editor believes further consideration is unlikely to be productive.
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 examine the entire file. The report from this second referee may be brief, especially if the second referee believes the initial review came to the right conclusion. The editor will consider the referee recommendations and then issue a decision regarding the appeal. This decision is final.
If the decision on your paper is changed to a revise-and-resubmit or acceptance, we will refund the appeal fee.
Data represents December 12, 2005 through July 1, 2022
There have been 256 appeals. Of those, 3 are under review as of July 1, 2022.
Accepted for eventual publication: 35
Rejected: 211
Return for revision: 6
Withdrawn 1
We update the statistics on this page annually.
There have been 256 appeals. Of those, 3 are under review as of July 1, 2022.
Accepted for eventual publication: 35
Rejected: 211
Return for revision: 6
Withdrawn 1
We update the statistics on this page annually.
If you are unhappy with the outcome of the appeal, you can write to the SFS president. While your complaint will be noted, the editorial decision will not be overruled.
You are entitled to no more than two unsuccessful appeals every four years. This applies to the entire coauthor team. No exceptions!