Complaints and Appeals Policy

 

Language Teaching Research Quarterly (LTRQ) is committed to conducting its editorial and publishing activities fairly, transparently, professionally, and in accordance with recognized standards of responsible scholarly publishing. The journal provides a formal mechanism through which authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and other stakeholders may raise concerns about the journal, its editorial processes, or its publishing practices.

 

1. Scope of Complaints

A complaint may concern any substantive or procedural aspect of the journal's activities, including, but not limited to:

• inappropriate conduct by an editor, reviewer, editorial staff member, or publisher;
• breaches of confidentiality;
• undisclosed or improperly managed conflicts of interest;
• suspected misuse of privileged or unpublished information;
• irregularities or significant errors in the editorial or peer-review process;
• unreasonable or unexplained administrative delays;
• concerns about the application of journal policies;
• concerns regarding authorship or contributorship;
• allegations of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, or other publication misconduct;
• concerns regarding corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions; and
• other matters that may reasonably affect the fairness, integrity, or transparency of the journal's publishing process.

Complaints concerning research or publication misconduct will be handled in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Policy and relevant publication-ethics procedures.

 

2. How to Submit a Complaint

Complaints should normally be submitted in writing to the LTRQ editorial office (LTRQSubmissions@gmail.com) or the designated publisher contact (Editorial@EUROKD.com). The complainant should provide sufficient information to enable the journal to understand and assess the matter.

Where applicable, a complaint should include:

• the complainant's name and contact information;
• the manuscript title, manuscript identification number, or article DOI, if relevant;
• a clear description of the concern;
• the individuals, procedures, or published material concerned;
• relevant dates and correspondence; and
• supporting evidence or documentation, where available.

 

Complaints should be specific and made in good faith. Anonymous complaints may be considered where they contain sufficiently credible and verifiable information to permit appropriate assessment.

 

3. Acknowledgement and Initial Assessment

The journal will acknowledge receipt of a complaint where the complainant's contact details are available.

The complaint will be assessed initially to determine:

1.     whether it falls within the journal's responsibility;

2.     whether sufficient information is available to assess the concern;

3.     whether an immediate action is required to protect authors, reviewers, editors, or the integrity of the scholarly record; and

4.     who is appropriately positioned to investigate or respond to the complaint.

Complaints will be handled as promptly as reasonably practicable, taking into account their complexity and the need for a fair assessment.

 

4. Impartial Handling of Complaints

A complaint will not be handled solely by an individual whose conduct or decision is the subject of the complaint.

Where a complaint concerns an Editor-in-Chief, Handling Editor, Guest Editor, reviewer, editorial staff member, or other person directly involved in the matter, responsibility for assessing the complaint will be transferred, where reasonably practicable, to an appropriately independent editor. Individuals involved in handling a complaint must disclose any relevant conflict of interest and should not participate in its assessment where their impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

 

5. Complaints Concerning Editorial Decisions

LTRQ recognizes that a complaint and an appeal are not necessarily the same.

An appeal concerns a request to reconsider an editorial decision about a manuscript. A complaint concerns the conduct or process through which an editorial or publishing matter was handled.

 

Authors may appeal an editorial decision where they have substantive grounds to believe that:

• a significant factual error affected the decision;
• a substantial procedural irregularity occurred;
• a relevant conflict of interest was not appropriately managed; or
• a serious misunderstanding of the manuscript materially affected the decision.

Disagreement with an editor's scholarly judgment, without substantive grounds indicating an error or procedural problem, is normally not sufficient for an appeal. Appeals should be submitted in writing with a clear explanation of the grounds for reconsideration and any supporting evidence.

 

6. Review of Appeals

An appeal will be assessed by an editor or other appropriately authorized person who was not directly responsible for the original decision, where reasonably practicable.

The review may determine that:

• the original decision is upheld;
• the manuscript should be reconsidered;
• additional editorial or external review is warranted; or
• another appropriate procedural action is required.

 

An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision. Editorial decisions following an appropriately conducted appeal are normally final. The journal will not provide repeated reconsideration of the same matter where no new substantive information or procedural concern has been presented.

 

7. Complaints Concerning Peer Review

Complaints about reviewers may include concerns relating to:

• breaches of confidentiality;
• undisclosed conflicts of interest;
• inappropriate or discriminatory conduct;
• misuse of unpublished material;
• inappropriate attempts to influence citation practices; or
• other conduct inconsistent with responsible peer review.

Such concerns will be assessed in accordance with LTRQ's peer-review and publication-ethics policies. Where appropriate, the journal may discontinue a reviewer's participation in the review process, seek an alternative reviewer, or take other measures necessary to protect the integrity of the review process.

 

8. Complaints Concerning Editors or Editorial Staff

Where a complaint concerns the conduct of an editor or member of the editorial staff, the matter will be reviewed by an appropriately independent person within the journal or publisher structure, taking account of the nature of the complaint and any relevant conflicts of interest. Where a complaint raises a serious ethical concern that cannot reasonably be resolved internally, the journal may seek appropriate independent advice or refer the matter to a relevant institution, professional body, or other competent authority where justified.

 

9. Complaints Concerning the Publisher

Complaints concerning the publisher, publishing practices, or matters outside the editorial authority of the journal will be referred to the appropriate publisher representative for assessment. The journal will seek to ensure that such complaints are considered independently from any editorial decision that may be affected by the complaint.

 

10. Confidentiality and Protection Against Retaliation

Complaints will be handled with appropriate confidentiality. Information will be shared only with individuals who need it to assess, investigate, or resolve the matter, subject to applicable legal, ethical, and institutional requirements. LTRQ does not tolerate retaliation against a person who raises a concern or makes a complaint in good faith. At the same time, deliberately false, malicious, threatening, or abusive complaints may be treated as inappropriate conduct and may not be pursued where there is no credible basis for the allegation.

 

11. Research and Publication Misconduct

Where a complaint raises an allegation of research or publication misconduct, LTRQ will assess the matter in accordance with its publication-ethics procedures and applicable COPE guidance. The journal may request clarification or documentation from authors, editors, reviewers, or other relevant parties and, where appropriate, may contact the relevant research institution, employer, funder, or other competent authority. The journal's role is primarily to protect the integrity of the scholarly record. Institutional or regulatory bodies may have responsibility for investigating and determining research misconduct by individuals.

 

12. Post-Publication Complaints

Complaints concerning a published article may result in editorial assessment and, where warranted, appropriate post-publication action. Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, the journal may:

• publish a correction;
• publish an editorial notice or expression of concern;
• request clarification or additional information;
• conduct further editorial assessment;
• initiate a retraction procedure; or
• take another appropriate action to protect the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.

 

Post-publication action will be undertaken in accordance with LTRQ's policies on corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions.

 

13. External Advice and Referral

If a matter cannot reasonably be resolved through the journal's internal procedures, LTRQ may seek independent or external advice where appropriate. Depending on the nature of the matter, this may include consultation with relevant research institutions, employers, funders, professional bodies, legal advisers, or appropriate publication-ethics resources. Where a matter is referred externally, the journal will continue to take reasonable steps to protect the integrity of the publication record.

 

14. Good-Faith and Evidence-Based Complaints

LTRQ encourages concerns to be raised promptly, respectfully, and in good faith. Complainants should provide factual information and supporting evidence where available. The submission of a complaint does not, by itself, imply that misconduct or wrongdoing has occurred. Allegations will be assessed fairly and will not be treated as established facts until the appropriate assessment has been completed.

 

15. Finality and Record Keeping

LTRQ will maintain appropriate records of substantive complaints, investigations, appeals, and resulting actions. The journal may decline to reopen a matter that has been appropriately investigated and resolved unless significant new evidence or a substantive procedural concern is presented. Where a complaint results in an action affecting the published scholarly record, the relevant action will be documented and, where appropriate, communicated publicly through the journal's established post-publication mechanisms.

 

16. Commitment to Fairness and Integrity

LTRQ is committed to ensuring that complaints and appeals are handled:

• fairly and without discrimination;
• independently and without inappropriate conflicts of interest;
• proportionately to the nature of the concern;
• confidentially where appropriate;
• within a reasonable period; and
• with the primary objective of protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.

The existence of a complaint or appeal will not influence editorial decisions except where the matter itself identifies a legitimate procedural, ethical, or scholarly issue requiring consideration. LTRQ will periodically review this policy and update it when necessary to reflect developments in responsible scholarly publishing and the journal's actual procedures.