Short Guide To New Editors
Introduction
The role of a journal editor is both challenging and rewarding. While it offers opportunities to shape the quality of published research, it can also be discouraging without regular interaction with associates, editorial staff, and fellow board members. This guide emphasizes practical steps, ethical standards, and professional relationships that new editors should establish in order to succeed.
Getting Started
Review existing editorial processes with the outgoing editor.
Compare workflows against OARS (Open Association of Research Societies) and COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.
Establish consistent use of checklists and monitoring practices with the publisher and journal manager.
Correct any non-compliant procedures immediately.
Relations with the Outgoing Editor
01
Ensure pending submissions are completed by the outgoing editor.
02
Request a proper handover of ongoing processes and records.
03
Respect past editorial decisions unless serious ethical breaches (e.g., plagiarism, data manipulation) are discovered.
04
Keep the transition smooth to avoid confusion or delays for authors.
Association with Other Editors and the Editorial Board
Relations with Authors
01
Communicate clearly with authors about expectations, using OARS guidelines, disclaimers, and submission instructions.
02
Warn authors about disciplinary actions for plagiarism, falsification, or data manipulation.
03
Provide authors with a checklist covering formatting, ethics, and submission requirements.
04
Maintain the journal’s integrity by ensuring all editorial feedback is constructive, professional, and consistent.
Transparency and Declarations
Editors must ensure transparency by securing the following from author
- Authorship responsibilities and contributions
- Copyright permissions for reused content
- Ethical consent for human/animal studies
- Conflict of interest declarations
- Funding acknowledgments
- Confirmation of originality and exclusivity of submission
Can Editors Publish in Their Own Journal?
Editors should not misuse their position for self-publication.
Any submissions by editors must undergo the same rigorous peer-review process as other manuscripts.
Decisions should be approved by the editorial board to avoid conflicts of interest.
Editorial Freedom and Association with the Publisher
Editors must have independence in decision-making based solely on scholarly merit.
Written agreements between publishers and editors should define terms, responsibilities, and dispute resolution processes.
Editorial decisions should not be influenced by commercial, political, or personal interests.
Financial and Commercial Considerations
- Commercial supplements or sponsored content should never compromise editorial quality or independence.
- Editors must ensure commercial activities are transparent and free from personal gain.
Handling Misconduct and Disputes
Global Journals® adheres to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ensuring
01
Editors must act firmly yet fairly in cases of plagiarism, falsification, or misconduct, following OARS/COPE flowcharts.
02
Authors and reviewers must be given the opportunity to respond before decisions are finalized.
03
Editors should publish errata, corrections, retractions, or disclaimers when necessary.
04
Serious disputes may require involving impartial mediators for resolution.
Steps Suggested by OARS for Editors During Review
Risk vs. Benefit Assessment
- Consider whether the benefits of the study outweigh potential damages.
Scientific Evaluation
Engaging a vibrant community of thousands of editors, peer reviewers, and authors across every discipline.
- Assess whether the study is scientifically valid and usable.
- Determine if the sample size is sufficient.
- Verify clarity of results and outcomes.
- Determine if the sample size is sufficient.
- Verify clarity of results and outcomes.
- Judge whether the publication will serve its intended purpose.
Ethical Safeguards
Editors should verify whether appropriate measures were taken to
- Reduce adverse effects and protect privacy.
- Minimise risk of physical or psychological harm.
- Maintain sovereignty (e.g., reusing information sheets and consent forms for certain audits and evaluations can demonstrate compliance with ethical standards, even without formal committee approval).
- Ascertain and document the methods researchers used to overcome the above challenges.
Clarification of Local Rules
Author-First Experience
- Where there is a risk of misinterpreting local laws or ethical norms, editors should obtain and provide to authors a clarification letter from the research ethics committee.
Through these sustained efforts, we’ve compressed the time from insight to impact cultivating an ecosystem where knowledge rapidly transforms into real-world progress.
Association with Reviewers
Editors must ensure transparency by securing the following from author
- Reviewers must have role clarity and understand journal expectations.
- Provide links to OARS guidelines to guide ethical reviewing.
- Reviewers should
- Deliver impartial and evidence-based feedback
- Decline reviews where bias may exist
- Deliver impartial and evidence-based feedback
- Disclose conflicts of interest
- Editors must evaluate reviewer performance and discontinue underperforming reviewers.
The Peer Review Process
Define clear review policies:
