Author Appeals Policy

CapitalMark Journal of Marketing & Finance

At CapitalMark Journal of Marketing & Finance, we are committed to ensuring a fair, unbiased, and transparent peer review process. We acknowledge that authors may occasionally disagree with editorial decisions, and in such cases, they have the right to request reconsideration. This policy provides authors with a structured pathway to appeal while maintaining the academic integrity and ethical standards of the journal.

1. Valid Grounds for Appeal

Authors may file an appeal if they believe that:

  • The decision was influenced by a significant misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the manuscript’s content, methodology, or findings.

  • Reviewer or editor feedback contained factual inaccuracies or failed to account for critical aspects of the research.

  • There is evidence of bias, conflict of interest, or procedural lapses during the review process.

Appeals must be evidence-driven. Appeals based solely on disagreement with reviewer recommendations, without justification, will not be considered.

2. Submitting an Appeal

Timeframe

  • Appeals must be submitted within 20 calendar days of receiving the decision letter.

  • Late appeals will only be reviewed under exceptional circumstances.

Formal Appeal Letter

  • Authors must send a formal appeal request addressed to the Editor-in-Chief via the journal’s official submission/contact system.

  • The appeal must include:

    • A clear explanation of the reasons for appeal.

    • Identification of specific factual, methodological, or procedural errors.

    • Supporting evidence or clarifications where relevant.

Optional Supporting Documents

  • Authors may also include:

    • A revised manuscript with tracked changes.

    • A detailed response to reviewer/editor concerns.

3. Appeal Review Process

Preliminary Review

  • The Editor-in-Chief will carefully review the appeal letter, manuscript, and decision history.

  • The handling editor or an independent editorial advisor may be consulted.

Further Evaluation (if required)
The Editor-in-Chief may decide to:

  • Send the manuscript back to the original reviewers with the author’s rebuttal.

  • Assign new, independent reviewers not previously involved.

  • Seek advice from a neutral member of the editorial board.

Final Decision

  • Possible outcomes include:

    • Upholding the original rejection.

    • Inviting revision and resubmission.

    • Accepting the manuscript with or without changes.

  • A written explanation will be sent to the authors, detailing the final outcome.

4. Appeal Limitations

  • Only one appeal per manuscript is permitted.

  • The journal makes no guarantee of reversal.

  • Appeals will be considered only if they are substantiated with valid evidence.

5. Ethical Considerations

  • If the appeal raises concerns of reviewer/editor misconduct, bias, or ethical breaches, it will be escalated to the Ethics Committee.

  • Corrective actions will follow COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines and may include:

    • Reassigning the manuscript to a new editor/reviewer.

    • Conducting an independent investigation.

    • Taking formal corrective measures if misconduct is confirmed.

6. Communication and Timeline

  • Acknowledgment: Appeals are acknowledged within 5 business days.

  • Resolution: Most appeals are reviewed and resolved within 4–8 weeks, depending on complexity.

The appeals procedure ensures that CapitalMark Journal of Marketing & Finance upholds fairness, transparency, and academic excellence while respecting the rights of authors.