Editors have the following responsibilities:
♦ To acknowledge receipt of submitted manuscripts within a few days of receipt and to ensure the efficient, fair and timely review process of submitted manuscripts.
♦ To ensure that submitted manuscripts are handled in a confidential manner, with no details being disclosed to anyone, with the exception of the referees, without the permission of the author, until a decision has been taken as to whether the manuscript is to be published.
♦ To invite reviewers, probably considering the use of an author's suggested referees for his/her submitted article, but to ensure that the suggestions do not lead to a positive bias (e.g. co-authors of previous publications, mentor). The editor maintains the right to use referees of his/her own choice.
♦ Not to use referees which an author has requested not to be consulted, unless the editor reasonably considers there to be a significant overriding interest in so doing.
♦ To ensure the confidentiality of the names and other details of referees; adjudication and appeal referees may be informed of the names of prior referees, if appropriate.
♦ To make the final decision concerning acceptance or rejection of a manuscript with reasonable speed and to communicate the decision in a clear and constructive manner.
♦ To decide to accept or reject a manuscript for publication with reference only to the manuscript’s importance, originality and clarity, and its relevance to the journal.
♦ To respect the intellectual independence of authors.
♦ To make known any conflicts of interest that might arise. Specifically, in cases where an editor is an author of a submitted manuscript, the manuscript must be passed to another editor for independent peer review.
♦ Not to use for their own research, work reported in unpublished submitted articles.
♦ To respond to any suggestions of scientific misconduct, usually through consultation with the author. This may require the publication of a formal 'retraction' or correction.
♦ To deal fairly with an author’s appeal against the rejection of a submitted manuscript.
♦ To monitor and ensure the fairness, timeliness, and thoroughness of the peer review process.
Reviewers have the following responsibilities:
♦ To provide written, unbiased, and informative feedback in a timely manner on the scientific value of the work, rating the work’s composition, scientific accuracy, originality, and interest to readers.
♦ To treat the manuscript as confidential; not sharing, discussing with third parties, or disclosing the information in the reviewed paper.
♦ To return/destroy/erase the manuscript and to inform the editor should they be unqualified to review the manuscript, or lack the time to review the manuscript, without undue delay.
♦ To judge the manuscript objectively and in a timely manner. Referees should not make personal criticism in their reviews.
♦ To return the manuscript without review to the editor if there is a conflict of interest.
Specifically, Referees should not review manuscripts authored or co-authored by a person with whom the referee has a close personal or professional relationship, if this relationship could be reasonably thought to bias the review.
♦ To explain and support their judgments so that editors and authors may understand the basis of their comments, and to provide reference to published work, where appropriate.
♦ To inform the editor of any similarity between the submitted manuscript and another either published or under consideration by another journal to the best of their knowledge.
♦ To ensure that all unpublished data, information, interpretation and discussion in a submitted article remain confidential and not to use reported work in unpublished, submitted articles for their own research.
♦ To alert the editor if a manuscript contains plagiarized material or falsified data to the best of their knowledge.