Journal Editors

EP Editors are expected to understand the scope of their role and accept their responsibilities in supporting and maintaining the integrity of scientific research, the peer review and publication processes.

General responsibilities of editors

Editorial decisions

EP adheres to the precepts of editorial independence as set out in COPE’s Core Practices on managing scholarly publications.

The editorial decisions made by the EP editors are independent and free from undue pressures from any parties in accordance with the EP’s ethical policy. The editors’ decisions regarding a manuscripts’ acceptance or rejection for publication is solely based on the manuscript's contribution to the field, originality, and clarity.

In the case of conflicting decisions by reviewers and / or the editor, the editor will have to communicate with the Editor-in Chief who will appoint one of the editors from the editorial board to act as an independent reviewer. The decision of the independent reviewer will be final. 

For sponsored publications, sponsors are expected to be neutral and not exert undue influence over editorial decisions. Sponsors will also not be involved in any of the processes involving editorial and policy decision making. The name of the sponsor, its role and responsibilities will be disclosed in all published content under the sponsor’s auspices.

Competing interests

Candidates should inform the EP’s editorial office before accepting the appointment as the editor, and then update if any new conflicts arise.

The editor must not be involved in editorial decisions regarding manuscripts in cases of potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, personal or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected with the manuscripts. In such circumstances, the editor needs to communicate with the Editor-in Chief for further action.

If any conflicts of interest are detected, the Editor-in Chief is authorised to remove the editor and replace him/her with another candidate with the consensus of the conference organizer.
 

Confidentiality

The editor should respect the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and protect the confidentiality of reviewers’ identities and all material submitted to the journals.

In case of suspected ethical misconduct, after consulting the Editor-in-Chief, the editor may share limited information about the investigation of the potential misconduct with reviewers /other editors/conference organizer.

The editors are strictly forbidden from using any unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript in their own research.

Fair play

The editors should apply consistent standards in peer review processes and evaluate manuscripts fairly without regard to the author/s' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, institutional affiliation, or political philosophy.

Submission and peer review process

The editors should apply consistent standards in their editorial processes while ensuring transparency, fairness, and lack of bias.

The editors should acknowledge receipt of submitted manuscripts within two working days of submission, select reviewers who have suitable expertise in the relevant field, monitor the performance of peer reviewers, and consider manuscripts submitted for publication with reasonable speed. Once a decision has been made, the editor should provide author/s with a brief but cogent explanation regarding the editorial decision pertaining to manuscript submitted.

The editors should encourage reviewers to consider ethical issues related to the research under review.

Suspected misconduct

The editors should ascertain that submissions do not contain any copied material from previously published or copyrighted work.

Editors must initiate in a timely manner a thorough investigation of all complaints and report the outcome of the investigation to the complainant. When any convincing evidence of misconduct is presented, the editor should cooperate with the publisher to publish as and when needed, clarifications (errata), corrections, retractions, apologies or other corrections.

EP benchmarks its ethical policies and processes against the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) flowcharts when investigating allegations of misconduct.

Publons

Peer review is a fundamental part of academic publishing. At European Proceedings, the peer review process is seen as the cornerstone of reliable, renowned, and responsible scientific publications.

Publons not only allows your contributions as a peer reviewer to be recognized by the academic community, but also increases the credibility and visibility of the series.

To gain recognition for your contribution and enhance the credibility and impact of our series among the academic community, we are inviting you to add your peer review records and endorse our series through Publons.com.

Find out more about the benefits of Publons

References 

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines on Editors in Chief sharing
• COPE Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (updated)
• COPE Core Practices
• COPE Flowcharts
• COPE Principles of Transparency and Best Practices