1. Purpose of the Appeals Policy

Zoological Records and Reviews is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, and accountable editorial process. This Appeals Policy outlines the procedure by which authors may appeal editorial decisions when they believe a decision was based on a misunderstanding, procedural error, or factual inaccuracy.

The policy ensures that appeals are handled objectively while preserving the integrity of the peer review process.

2. Grounds for Appeal

Authors may submit an appeal only under the following circumstances:

• Evidence of a clear factual or technical error in the editorial or peer review assessment
• Evidence that the peer review process was not conducted in accordance with the journal’s stated policies
• Demonstration that relevant scientific information was misunderstood or overlooked

Disagreement with reviewer opinions alone does not constitute valid grounds for appeal.

3. Appeal Submission Process

Appeals must be submitted in writing by the corresponding author to the editorial office within a reasonable timeframe following the editorial decision.

The appeal must include:

• The manuscript title and ID
• A clear explanation of the grounds for appeal
• A point-by-point response addressing the specific issues raised
• Supporting evidence where applicable

Appeals should be submitted through the journal’s official communication channels.

4. Editorial Review of Appeals

Upon receipt of an appeal, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated senior editor will conduct an independent assessment of the case. This may involve:

• Reviewing the original manuscript
• Re-evaluating reviewer reports
• Consulting additional independent reviewers or editorial board members, if necessary

Editors involved in the original decision may be excluded from the appeal review to ensure impartiality.

5. Possible Outcomes

Following review, the appeal may result in one of the following outcomes:

• The original decision is upheld
• A revised decision is issued
• The manuscript is sent for additional peer review

The decision made after the appeal review is final.

6. Confidentiality

All appeal proceedings are handled confidentially. Information related to appeals is shared only with individuals directly involved in the evaluation process.

7. Ethical Considerations

The journal does not tolerate abusive, threatening, or inappropriate language in appeal submissions. Appeals must be presented professionally and respectfully.

Repeated or unfounded appeals may result in restrictions on future submissions.

8. Appeals Related to Ethical Issues

Appeals involving ethical concerns, including allegations of bias, misconduct, or procedural violations, are handled in accordance with the journal’s Ethics and Malpractice Statement and COPE guidelines.

9. Policy Transparency and Review

This Appeals Policy is publicly available on the journal’s website and is reviewed periodically to ensure alignment with best practices in scholarly publishing and indexing requirements.