Editorial Rules

October 28, 2025

Editorial Rules

The success of Global Journals® depends on the commitment, expertise, and guidance of our Editors and Editorial Boards, working in partnership with the publisher. Our editorial team is central to shaping content, preserving high standards, and protecting the integrity of each journal.

Our Editorial Rules define how editors, reviewers, and staff conduct themselves to safeguard fairness, quality, and trust in the publication process. These rules ensure that all decisions are based on merit, that ethical standards are respected, and that contributors are treated transparently and respectfully.

Core Principles

  • Editorial Independence
  • Editors make decisions based strictly on scholarly merit, relevance, and integrity of submissions. Commercial, personal, or political influences must not affect editorial choices.
  • Fairness & Impartiality
  • All manuscripts are judged on the basis of scientific rigor, novelty, clarity, and contribution, irrespective of authors’ affiliations, language, gender, or reputation.
  • Conflict of Interest Management
  • Editors must recuse themselves from handling any manuscript in which they have a direct or indirect conflict (e.g. collaborator, same institution, financial interest). Another editor should be appointed.
  • Confidentiality
  • Unpublished manuscripts, peer reviews, editorial deliberations, and communications remain confidential at all stages, before and after decisions are made.
  • Ethical Oversight
  • Editors must remain vigilant for issues such as plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission, image manipulation, or misuse of AI. In such cases they must initiate proper investigation and corrective action.

Editorial Workflow Rules

  • Initial Assessment
  • The editor should first screen submissions to ensure they fit journal scope, meet basic standards of structure and ethics, and are not clearly unsuitable.
  • Decision & Revision Handling
  • Eligible manuscripts are sent to qualified, independent reviewers (who must lack conflicts of interest).
  • Reviewers’ reports may conflict; in such cases, the editor may seek additional reviews or act as arbiter.
  • Editors should monitor review timelines and follow through on overdue or incomplete reviews.
  • Decision & Revision Handling
  • Decisions (accept, revise, reject) should come with clear, constructive feedback.
  • If revisions are requested, authors are given fair opportunity to respond.
  • Editors should carefully assess revised submissions against reviewer suggestions and the original manuscript.
  • Post-Acceptance / Production
  • Upon acceptance, manuscripts move to production, copyediting, typesetting, proofs. Editors oversee that content is not altered substantively without author review.
  • Corrections, Retractions, Editorial Notices
  • If errors or misconduct emerge post-publication, editors may issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions. These must be clearly linked to the published work and explain the rationale.

Behavior & Professional Conduct

  • Editors should engage with authors, reviewers, and staff professionally, courteously, and respectfully, with no harassment, bias, or retaliation.
  • Editors should disclose any personal or professional relationship that might affect their objectivity.
  • Editorial board composition and affiliations should be transparent.
  • Editors should strive for diversity in reviewer selection (geographic, gender, discipline) in alignment with DEI goals.
  • Editors are expected to abide by recognized ethical guidance frameworks such as COPE, and align with publishing ethics principles.