Editorial Responsibilities and Publication Decisions

The role of an editor in a peer-reviewed journal involves determining which submitted articles are suitable for publication, often in collaboration with the associated society for journals owned or sponsored by societies. These decisions should be guided by the significance and validity of the work for the research community and readers. Editors are advised to follow the journal’s editorial board policies and adhere to legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. They may also consult with fellow editors, reviewers, or society officials during the decision-making process.

Ensuring Fairness

Editors are expected to assess manuscripts based solely on their scholarly merit, without discrimination based on the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic background, citizenship, or political views.

Maintaining Confidentiality

Editors and their editorial staff are obligated to keep information about a manuscript confidential, sharing details only with the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher as needed.

Handling Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not use unpublished information from manuscripts in their own research without the author’s explicit permission. They must keep information and ideas acquired through peer review confidential and not use them for personal gain. Editors should avoid handling manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest due to relationships with authors, companies, or institutions. They should also ensure all contributors disclose any potential conflicts of interest and take appropriate actions, such as publishing corrections or retractions, if conflicts are discovered after publication. The peer-review process for sponsored supplements should match that of the main journal, with decisions made based on academic merit and reader interest, not commercial influence. Non-peer-reviewed sections should be clearly marked.

Engaging in Ethical Investigations

Upon receiving ethical complaints about a submitted or published paper, editors, in collaboration with the publisher or society, should take appropriate steps. This typically involves contacting the author and investigating the complaint, possibly involving relevant institutions. If the complaint is validated, publishing a correction, retraction, or expressing concern might be necessary. All allegations of unethical publishing behavior should be investigated, regardless of when they were made.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Supporting Editorial Decisions

Peer review is crucial for editorial decisions and can help authors enhance their papers. It’s a fundamental aspect of scholarly communication and the scientific method. Reviewers contribute significantly to the field by fulfilling their reviewing duties.

Prompt Communication

Reviewers unable to review a manuscript or ensure a timely review should inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality Obligation

Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential, not disclosed to or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

Objective Reviewing

Reviews should be impartial and focus on the manuscript’s content, avoiding personal criticism. Reviewers should clearly justify their viewpoints with arguments.

Citing Sources

Reviewers should point out relevant work not cited by the authors and alert the editor to any substantial similarity with other published work they know of.

Avoiding Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must not use unpublished material from manuscripts for their own research without written permission from the authors. They should maintain confidentiality and not review manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest due to personal or professional relationships with any authors, companies, or institutions involved.