Individuals may appeal an adverse decision of the journal under limited circumstances.  An author may initiate an appeal by sending a request to the journal email address (apsr@apsanet.org) with “Appeal: [Manuscript number]” in the subject line. The body of the email should be a letter describing the basis for the appeal. Manuscripts that have been appealed must not be submitted to another journal until the appeal outcome is determined.  Rejection decisions without reviews (“desk rejections”) cannot be appealed. 

In order for the editors to consider the appeal, an appeal request must lay out the grounds for the appeal, keeping in mind that mere disagreement with the editor’s reasoned decision is not likely to be successful and such appeals are strongly discouraged. Appropriate grounds include: 

• Significant errors of fact in the letter or reviews 
• Procedural irregularities or improprieties in the review process 
• Unethical behavior by reviewers 
• Conflicts of interest 
• Other exceptional circumstances 

The letter should also establish that these concerns have had a substantial effect on the decision to reject the manuscript. 

The APSR will not consider an appeal until 14 days after a decision has been rendered. An appeal must be submitted within 60 days of the date of the original decision letter.  

1. The APSR ethics editor will initially review the appeal. If the appeal does not meet the threshold for further consideration, it will be rejected. Otherwise, the ethics editor will forward the appeal to the original handling editor. If the ethics editor handled the appealed manuscript, another member of the ethics committee will take on their role. 
2. On receiving an appeal, the handling editor can:
   • Agree with the appeal. The handling editor will then coordinate with the ethics editor and, as appropriate, an additional editor on an appropriate course of action, which may include soliciting additional reviews or consulting with members of the editorial board. Any decision on the appeal must be agreed upon by at least two editors. 
   • Disagree with the appeal. The handling editor will then summarize why the original decision should stand in spite of the appeal. Both the original appeal request letter and the handling editor’s comments are then assigned to a new editor by the ethics editor. The new handling editor can decide to reject the appeal or accept the appeal and determine, in communication with the ethics editor, an appropriate course of action as above. 
3. The decision on the appeal, together with additional reviews (if any), is then communicated to the appealing author.