EDITOR ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Editors of scientific journals have responsibilities toward the authors who provide the contents of the journals, the peer reviewers who comment on the suitability of manuscripts for publication, the journal’s readers and the scientific community, the publishers of the journals, and the public as a whole.
EDITORIAL BOARD PARTICIPATION
The editor-in-chief should define the terms and roles of the editors and editorial board that are appointed by and report to him or her. The editor-in-chief or principal editor should ensure that the journal’s editors and editorial board are identified in the journal masthead; receive the necessary training and oversight to adequately perform editorial functions; and actively perform their responsibilities, such as assigning reviewers or reviewing manuscripts and advising on policy considerations.
The ILR adopts the editor freedom, which holds that Editors-in-Chief have full authority over the entire content of the selected articles, which are to be published in ILR. Some of the privileges are as follows.
- Editors-in-Chief owners should have the power of evaluation, selection, scheduling, or editing of individual articles either directly or by creating an environment that strongly influences decisions.
- Editors should base editorial decisions on the validity of the work and its importance to the journal’s readers, not on the commercial implications for the journal.
- Editors-in-chief should have the responsibility to establish an independent editorial advisory board to help the editor establish and maintain editorial policy.
- Editors should seek input as needed from a broad array of advisers, such as reviewers, editorial staff, an editorial board, and readers, to support editorial decisions and potentially controversial expressions of opinion
- If legal problems arise, the Editor should inform their legal adviser and their owner and/or publisher as soon as possible.
- Editors should defend the confidentiality of authors and peer-reviewers (names and reviewer comments) in accordance with ILR policy.
Manuscripts submitted to journals are privileged communications that are authors’ private, confidential property, and authors may be harmed by premature disclosure of any or all of a manuscript’s details. Editors therefore must not share information about manuscripts, including whether they have been received and are under review, their content and status in the review process, criticism by reviewers, and their ultimate fate, to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. ILR has some policies on confidentiality as follows.
TIMELINESS OF THE PUBLICATION PROCESS
- Editors and the publication staff should keep all information about a submitted manuscript confidential, sharing it only with those involved in the evaluation, review, and publication processes.
- Editors should consider adding a confidentiality notice to all correspondence, including reviewer forms, to serve as a reminder to authors, editors, and reviewers.
- Confidential information should not be used for an editor’s own purposes, and editors should take reasonable steps to ensure that such information is not used inappropriately for the advantage of others. In cases of breach of confidentiality by those involved in the peer-review process, editors should contact the involved parties and follow up on such cases until they are satisfactorily resolved.
- Requests from third parties to use manuscripts and reviews for legal proceedings should be politely refused, and editors should do their best not to provide such confidential material should it be subpoenaed.
- Editors should not publish or publicize peer reviewers’ comments without permission of the reviewer and author.
- Confidentiality may have to be breached if dishonesty or fraud is alleged, but editors should notify authors or reviewers if they intend to do so and confidentiality must otherwise be honored.
The Editor-in-Chief of ILR ensures timely processing of manuscripts with the resources available with them. The Editor-in-Chief of ILR should endeavor to reject the manuscript as soon as possible to allow authors to submit to a different journal. Timeliness is essential for electronic journals, or e-journals. ILR is released on timely schedule.
Editorial decisions should be based on the relevance of a manuscript to the journal and on the manuscript’s originality, quality, and contribution to evidence about important questions. Those decisions should not be influenced by commercial interests, personal relationships or agendas, or findings that are negative or that credibly challenge accepted wisdom. The ILR has very strong ethical policy, which is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines Readers, authors, reviewers and editors should follow these ethical policies once working with ILR.
ILR is a double blind peer reviewed electronic quarterly publication concerned with all aspects of Law. ILR publishes original research papers, review papers, case reports, short communications, letters to editor and authors’ response about letters to editor across the broad field of Law. The publication exercises peer review process in order to quality control by qualified specialists is covered by the database. The Editorial Board will select publications with excellence in content, preferably researchers output not in commercial target.
In addition to rapid Peer Review Process, the ILR Journal has Post-Publication Evaluation by the scientific community. Post-Publication Evaluation is concentrated to ensure that the quality of published research, review and case report meets certain standards and the conclusions that are presented are justified.
RESPONSIBILITY OF PEER-REVIEW PROCESS
Articles submitted to the ILR Journal are allowed through peer-review process under various levels, as follows.
- Authors: Authors should abide by all principles of authorship.
- Editors: The editors should abide by all principles of Confidentiality, Timeliness, Peer Review and Integrity.
- Reviewers: Manuscripts submitted to journals are privileged communications that are authors’ private, confidential property, and authors may be harmed by premature disclosure of any or all of a manuscript’s details. Hence, reviewers should abide by all principles of Responsibilities of Reviewers.
All contributing authors should qualify for authorship. The order of authorship should be a joint decision of the coauthors. Sufficient participation in the work is of utmost importance.
Journals should make clear the type of copyright under which authors work will be published. Upon acceptance of manuscript, authors will be asked to complete a Journal Publishing Agreement'
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Authors are requested to evident whether impending conflicts do or do not exist while submitting their articles to ILR through Conflict of Interest Disclosure form.
NEED OF CORRECTIONS
When an author(s) discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher to retract or correct the manuscript. If a correction is needed, journals should follow these minimum standards:
- The journal should publish a correction notice as soon as possible detailing changes from and citing the original publication.
- The journal should post a new article version with details of the changes from the original version.
- The journal should archive only recent versions of the article.
- The electronic versions should prominently note that there are more recent versions of the article.
- The citation should be to the most recent version.
Manuscripts that have been rejected are not eligible for further consideration by the ILR journal and thus rejected manuscript should not be resubmitted. If a revision is allowed, it will be explicitly stated in the Editor’s decision. Other revisions of previously rejected manuscripts will be promptly returned to the authors without review.
There are four types of overlapping publications including Duplicate submission, Duplicate publication, Acceptable secondary publication and manuscript based on the same database.
PROTECTING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
- Duplicate submission: The possibility that two or more journals will unknowingly and unnecessarily undertake the work of peer review, edit the same manuscript, and publish the same article. Hence, authors should not submit the same manuscript, in the same or different languages, simultaneously to more than one journal.
- Duplicate publication: Duplicate publication is publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published, without clear, visible reference to the previous publication. Duplicate publication of original research is particularly problematic because it can result in inadvertent double-counting of data or inappropriate weighting of the results of a single study, which distorts the available evidence.
- Manuscript based on the same database: If editors receive manuscripts from separate research groups or from the same group analyzing the same data set (for example, from a public database, or systematic reviews or meta-analyses of the same evidence), the manuscripts should be considered independently because they may differ in their analytic methods, conclusions, or both. If the data interpretation and conclusions are similar, it may be reasonable although not mandatory for editors to give preference to the manuscript submitted first. Editors might consider publishing more than one manuscript that overlap in this way because different analytical approaches may be complementary and equally valid, but manuscripts based upon the same dataset should add substantially to each other to warrant consideration for publication as separate papers, with appropriate citation of previous publications from the same dataset to allow for transparency.
- Acceptable secondary publication: Secondary publication of material published in other journals or online may be justifiable and beneficial, especially when intended to disseminate important information to the widest possible audience.
Protecting intellectual property is a primary responsibility of the reviewer and the editor. Reviewers, therefore, will not use ideas from or show another person the manuscript they have been asked to review without the explicit permission of the manuscript's author, obtained through the journal editor. Advice regarding specific, limited aspects of the manuscript may be sought from colleagues with specific expertise, provided the author’s identity and intellectual property remain secure.
VIOLATION OF PUBLICATION ETHICS
All manuscripts under review or published with ILR are subject to screening using Plagiarism Prevention Software. Plagiarism is a serious violation of publication ethics. Other violations include duplicate publication, data fabrication and falsification, and improper credit of author contribution.
HANDLING CASES OF MISCONDUCT
Once ILR confirms a violation against ILR’s publication ethics, ILR addresses ethical concerns diligently in various issue-specific standard practices
SHARING OF REVIEWING RESPONSIBILITIES
Sharing of reviewing responsibilities is inappropriate. The review is the sole responsibility of the person to whom it was assigned by the journal editor. Students and colleagues should not be asked to prepare reviews unless the journal editor has given explicit prior approval. Each person contributing to a review should receive formal recognition.
SUPPLEMENTS AND SPECIAL SERIES
Supplements are collections of papers that deal with related issues or topics, are published as a separate issue of the journal or as part of a regular issue, and may be funded by sources other than the journal’s publisher. Because funding sources can bias the contents of supplements through the choice of topics and viewpoints, journals should adopt the following principles, which also apply to theme issues, or special series that have external funding and/or guest editors:
- The journal editor must be given and must take full responsibility for the policies, practices, and contents of supplements, including complete control of the decision to select authors, peer reviewers, and contents for the supplement. Editing by the funding organization should not be permitted.
- The journal editor has the right to appoint one or more external editors of the supplement and must take responsibility for the work of those editors.
- The journal editor must retain the authority to send supplement manuscripts for external peer review and to reject manuscripts submitted for the supplement with or without external review. These conditions should be made known to authors and any external editors of the supplement before beginning editorial work on it.
- The source of the idea for the supplement, sources of funding for the supplement’s research and publication, and products of the funding source related to content considered in the supplement should be clearly stated in the introductory material.
- Advertising in supplements should follow the same policies as those of the primary journal.
- Journal editors must enable readers to distinguish readily between ordinary editorial pages and supplement pages.
- Journal and supplement editors must not accept personal favors or direct remuneration from sponsors of supplements.
- The same principles of authorship and disclosure of potential conflicts of interest discussed elsewhere in this document should be applied to supplements.
Journals should not carry advertisements and Editors should have full and final authority for approving online advertisements and for enforcing advertising policy. Further, Editors should consider all criticisms of advertisements for publication.