Editorial responsibilities
- Handle manuscripts in the section you are assigned to, from first assessment to final decision.
- Make decisions on the evidence in the reviews, not on the reputation of authors or institutions.
- Keep authors informed and keep the review timeline realistic; escalate delays to the editor-in-chief.
- Commission or solicit content where the journal's scope would otherwise leave a gap.
Managing peer review
- Screen submissions for scope, completeness and ethics compliance before inviting reviewers.
- Invite at least two independent reviewers who have no competing interest in the work.
- Resolve conflicting reviews by reading the manuscript yourself and, where needed, inviting a third opinion.
- Ensure that rejected manuscripts are not re-reviewed after only cosmetic changes.
Publication ethics
- Follow COPE guidance on authorship disputes, plagiarism, duplicate submission and data fabrication.
- Require corrections, expressions of concern or retractions where the record demands it, and link them to the original article.
- Protect reviewer and author confidentiality, and disclose your own competing interests.
- Never submit your own work to a journal you edit; route handling to an independent editor.
Tools and training
- Editorial work happens in the journal's online system: submissions, reviews, decisions and issues are all recorded there.
- Templates exist for decision letters, reviewer invitations and issue front matter.
- New editors receive an induction session and a written handbook; ongoing training is offered annually.
Joining an editorial team
- Editorial positions are open to researchers with a record of peer review and clear subject expertise.
- Expressions of interest should include a CV, a short statement of interest and preferred section.
- Appointments are made for a renewable three-year term by the publisher with the editor-in-chief.
