Appeals Policy
The following policy describes the time frame for making an appeal and how SPE will address any appeals received for papers declined during the peer review process.
A. If the decision was an initial decline (paper rejected by Executive Editor as unsuitable for review or outside the scope of coverage of the journal prior to review)
The author would have 90 days from the date of the decline letter to file an appeal. The author would send a letter to SPE peer review staff contesting the decline decision and outlining in detail why the paper merits review by this journal. If the Executive Editor of the journal finds the author’s argument to be persuasive, the paper will be put into the normal peer review process.
If the Executive Editor believes that the author’s appeal is without merit, he/she will forward the paper and any correspondence to the Editor-in-Chief who will make a decision about whether the paper should be reviewed by this or any other SPE journal. The decision of the Editor-in-Chief is final.
B. If the decision was to decline the paper following review
The author would have 90 days from the date of the decline letter to file an appeal. The author would send a letter to SPE peer review staff appealing the decision and responding in detail to the comments of the reviewers provided in the decline letter.
The Executive Editor will review the appeal with objective to determine whether he/she found the author’s rebuttal compelling, and to be assured that the reviewers acted impartially in their review.
If the Executive Editor does not find that the appeal has merit and believes that it should still be declined, the paper, along with all the relevant information, will be transferred to the Editor-in-Chief for a final decision.
If the Executive Editor finds that the appeal has (or may have) merit, he/she could do one of the following:
- Reverse the decision based on the strength of the author’s appeal and an evaluation of the paper’s reviewer comments and history.
- Select one (or more) additional reviewers, who were not involved in the original review, for further review of the paper. These may be other members of the review team who have appropriate expertise, or individuals outside the review team with appropriate credentials. The reviewers will be given copies of the prior reviews and communications related to the appeal. The Executive Editor may also elect to serve himself/herself in the role of additional reviewer.
If, after additional review, the Executive Editor believes that the paper still should be declined, the complete file including the paper, reviews, and copies of communications will be transferred to the Editor-in-Chief for a final decision. Otherwise, the new decision will be promptly communicated to the author.
Upon receipt of an appealed paper from an Executive Editor, the Editor-in-Chief has the option to do one of the following three:
- Accept the Executive Editor’s decision.
- Reverse the decision based on the strength of the author’s appeal and the evaluation of the paper’s reviewer comments and history.
- Select one (or more) additional reviewers, who were not involved in the original review, for further review of the paper. These may be other members of the review team who have appropriate expertise, or individuals outside the review team with appropriate credentials. The reviewers will be given copies of the prior reviews and communications related to the appeal. The Editor-in-Chief may also elect to serve himself/herself in the role of additional reviewer. Following this additional review, the Editor-in-Chief will make a final decision regarding the paper.
The results of the above process will be communicated to the author. The decision of the Editor-in-Chief is final
Communications with SPE's peer review staff may be sent via email to peer@speservicecorp.com or by mail to 222 Palisades Creek Drive, Richardson, Texas USA 75080.
