Month: March 2016

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for E.B. Members – Complaints against the publication

    It is vital for editorial staff to concentrate on engendering scholarly debate through quality publication; new and refreshing work draws attention and raises the integrity of the publishing industry at large. This will of course entail comments, constructive criticism, and complaints (which should be encouraged as much as possible) that need to be dealt with […]

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for E.B. Members – Confidentiality

    1    No documents should be shared with the editor of other journals or organisations unless permission is granted or in specific cases of misconduct. 2    There is generally no rule obliging editorial staff intosubmitting articles to lawyers for court cases. 3    Confidentiality on the part of the peer reviewer and author must be stressed. Systems […]

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for E.B. Members – Responsibility

    1    Editorial members of any publication must respect the personal privacy of the individuals involved whilst gathering data, only publishing the information that is considered to be in the public’s interest. 2    Editorial board members should not invade the privacy of individuals unless they are public figures and the intrusions are related to theirpublic activity. […]

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for E.B. Members – Independence from outside influence

    1    All decisions made by the editorial team must be free from bias and influence, whether it is political, financial, ideological, or otherwise. 2    An editor should base their decision making process on the quality of the written content alone and be fully accountable for whichever course of action they decide to take. An environment […]

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for E.B. Members – Consistency of conduct

    1    Editors take full responsibility for the content of their publications and understand the effects that bad practice can have upon society at large. Robust systems should be in place to ensure all published content is correct, checked, and ethically sourced before publication. 2    Editorial board members must always balance the informative aspect of published […]

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for E.B. Members 1

    Editors are the custodians of the publishing world. They hold an exclusive position, enabling them to ensure that the integrity of ethical value is upheld in full and without compromise. As such, all editorial board members should take their responsibilities seriously and act with due consideration, submitting all documents or articles to meticulous scrutiny before […]

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for E.B. Members

    •    Editorial staff should adhere to a strict code of conduct, aiming to provide accurate, reputable, and original publications that meet all current legislation and quality standards. •    Possible conflicts of interest regarding the authors, reviewers, and team members should be scrutinised, making sure printed material is free from bias whether it be financial, political, […]

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for Reviewers – Post review

    Reviewers should continue to keep details of the manuscript and its review confidential. If the reviewer is contacted by a journal regarding details of the review, they should respond immediately and submit any information requested. Whereupon a reviewer discovers additional relevant matter post-review that may affect their recommendations, the journal should be contacted immediately. If […]

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for Reviewers – Expectations

    1 A manuscript which a reviewer has previously assessed for another publication may have changed between the two submissions. It is imperative a fresh assessment is conducted to reflect different criteria for evaluation and acceptance of another journal. 2 Suggestions for the instigation of an alternative reviewer must not be influenced by personal considerations or […]

  • Excerpt from the P.I.E. Guidelines for Reviewers – Recognition of status

    1 Editors and journals must be supplied with comment that is based on the peer reviewer’s professional area of expertise and represents an accurate reflection of this. 2 If a reviewer gives a false impersonation of another person or suggests the work has been conducted by another person, this will be considered serious misconduct. 3 […]