Complaints

Complaints may relate to editorial conduct, reviewer conduct, breach of confidentiality, undisclosed conflicts of interest, misuse of privileged information, unreasonable delay, administrative irregularity, errors in published content, or concerns about journal policies. Complaints must be sent to bjrd.ovc@rub.edu.bt with a clear description and supporting evidence.

Complaints about the Editor-in-Chief must be handled by an independent senior Editorial Board member or a publisher-appointed representative with no conflict of interest.

Complaint Process and Target Timelines

BJRD aims to acknowledge complaints within 5 working days where contact details are available. A preliminary assessment is normally completed within 15 working days. Straightforward administrative or process complaints normally receive a written response within 30 working days. Complex ethics, authorship, peer-review, or post-publication complaints may require 30–60 working days or longer if institutional input is needed.

Appeals against Editorial Decisions

Authors may appeal a rejection or major editorial decision where they believe there has been a procedural error, demonstrable misunderstanding, conflict of interest, factual error, or evidence that the decision was not supported by the review record. Appeals must be submitted within 15 working days of the decision and must provide a reasoned response with evidence. Appeals based only on disagreement with reviewer opinion are unlikely to succeed.

Appeal Outcomes

BJRD aims to acknowledge appeals within 5 working days. An appeal is normally assessed within 30 working days by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent editor not involved in the original decision. The journal may uphold the decision, invite a revised manuscript, seek additional review, request clarification, or reverse the decision. The appeal decision is normally final for that manuscript.

Independence, Recusal and Escalation

Anyone involved in the original decision or complaint must be recused from the appeal or complaint review if they have a conflict of interest. Where the matter concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the publisher or an independent senior Editorial Board member must appoint an alternative decision-maker. Where the matter requires institutional investigation, BJRD may refer it to the relevant institution, ethics committee, employer, funder, or other responsible body.

Repeated, Abusive or Bad-faith Complaints

BJRD will consider evidence-based concerns seriously, including anonymous or whistleblower concerns where evidence is sufficient. However, the journal may limit correspondence where complaints are abusive, discriminatory, threatening, repetitive without new evidence, or submitted in bad faith.