Advance Search

For Editors

Guidance for Editors-in-Chief, Editorial Board Members, and Guest Editors of journals published by Oxfordshire Academic Publishing.

1.1     Editorial Roles

1.1.1    Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief (EiC) is the senior academic leader of the journal and bears ultimate responsibility for the journal's scientific direction, quality, scope, and reputation. The role is an honorary academic appointment. The EiC serves an initial term of two years, renewable by mutual agreement following performance review.

The principal responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief are:

  • Providing academic leadership and strategic direction for the journal, including defining and maintaining the journal's scope and aims;
  • Taking final acceptance decisions on manuscripts following peer review, either personally or through appropriate delegation to Editorial Board members;
  • Ensuring that peer review is conducted rigorously, fairly, and efficiently, and that decisions are communicated to authors with appropriate explanations;
  • Appointing, overseeing, and supporting Guest Editors for special issues and topical collections;
  • Identifying, recruiting, and reviewing the composition of the Editorial Board to ensure appropriate disciplinary coverage and diversity;
  • Promoting the journal within the relevant research community and contributing to its growth and reputation;
  • Ensuring compliance with OAP's editorial policies and with applicable COPE guidelines at all times;
  • Reporting to OAP's Managing Editor on matters of editorial concern, including suspected misconduct.

As recognition of the Editor-in-Chief's voluntary contribution, OAP waives the APC for up to two articles per year in which the EiC is the corresponding author, submitted to any journal in the OAP portfolio. This benefit is personal to the individual serving as EiC and is not transferable.

The Editor-in-Chief must not handle any manuscript in which they have a conflict of interest, including manuscripts from their own institution, current or recent collaborators, or students. Where such a conflict exists, the manuscript will be assigned to a designated Deputy Editor or an independent Editorial Board member.

1.1.2    Editorial Board Members

Members of the Editorial Board are distinguished researchers appointed by the Editor-in-Chief with the concurrence of OAP. Board membership is reviewed annually. The principal responsibilities of Editorial Board members are:

  • Reviewing manuscripts assigned to them by the Editor-in-Chief within their area of expertise, and providing timely, constructive, and expert editorial decisions;
  • Contributing to, or leading, special issues and topical collections as Guest Editors where invited;
  • Advising the Editor-in-Chief on the evolving scope and focus of the journal;
  • Promoting the journal at conferences and within their professional networks;
  • Upholding OAP's editorial policies and COPE guidelines in all their editorial activities.

Editorial Board members are expected to handle at minimum one to three manuscripts per year. Members who are consistently unable to meet this expectation will be reviewed, and continued membership may not be renewed. OAP provides all Editorial Board members with access to the online editorial management system and with relevant training and policy updates.

1.1.3    Guest Editors

Guest Editors are invited to manage the peer review of manuscripts submitted as part of a designated special issue or thematic collection. Guest Editors are typically subject-matter specialists whose expertise is particularly relevant to the topic of the special issue. They are appointed for the duration of the special issue only.

Guest Editors must comply with all of OAP's editorial policies and with COPE guidelines throughout their appointment. In particular:

  • Guest Editors must declare any potential conflict of interest with respect to any author whose manuscript is assigned to them, and must recuse themselves from those assignments;
  • Guest Editors must not be from the same institution as, nor be a current or recent close collaborator of, any author whose manuscript they are handling;
  • Guest Editors must not make the final acceptance decision on their own submitted manuscripts; such manuscripts will be handled by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent Editorial Board member;
  • Guest Editors must not manipulate the composition of the reviewer pool to favour acceptance of any particular manuscript.

1.2     The Editorial Process in Detail

1.2.1    Manuscript Submission and Assignment

All manuscripts are submitted through OAP's online editorial management system. Upon submission, the Managing Editor conducts an initial editorial check (see For Authors) and, if the manuscript passes, assigns it to the appropriate Editor-in-Chief or Guest Editor. Editors receive automated notifications when manuscripts are assigned to them.

1.2.2    Reviewer Selection and Invitation

The handling editor is responsible for identifying and inviting qualified peer reviewers. OAP requires a minimum of two independent expert reviewers per manuscript. In selecting reviewers, editors must:

  • Ensure reviewers have relevant expertise in the subject matter of the manuscript;
  • Ensure reviewers are free from conflicts of interest (as defined in OAP's ethics policy);
  • Avoid inviting reviewers who are at the same institution as any author, who are current or recent collaborators of any author, or who have a personal or financial interest in the manuscript;
  • Consider author-suggested reviewers, but independently verify suitability and the absence of conflicts of interest;
  • Not invite reviewers whom authors have excluded, unless there are compelling scientific reasons (which must be documented);
  • Actively seek diverse representation in the reviewer pool, including with respect to geography, career stage, gender, and institutional type.

Editors should not select reviewers solely from the manuscript's reference list, as this may inadvertently invite those with an interest in the work. OAP's editorial management system supports reviewer database searching; editors may also recommend new reviewers for addition to the database.

1.2.3    Handling Reviewer Reports and Making Decisions

Upon receipt of reviewer reports, the handling editor is responsible for evaluating them and reaching an independent editorial decision. Editors are not bound by the majority view of reviewers; editorial decisions must reflect the editor's own considered assessment of the manuscript's merits in light of the reviewer reports. Editors should communicate clear, constructive, and detailed decision letters to authors.

Editors must take particular care in evaluating reviewer reports that appear to be superficial, contradictory, or unduly harsh without justification. Where a reviewer report is clearly inadequate, the editor should seek an additional review rather than basing a decision on a single report.

1.2.4    Conflicts of Interest and Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions on all manuscripts must be made solely on the basis of scientific and scholarly merit, compliance with ethical requirements, and relevance to the journal's scope. No commercial, financial, institutional, or personal consideration may influence editorial decisions.

No individual from OAP's commercial, marketing, or administrative operations may access information about the editorial status of specific manuscripts, approach editors about specific manuscripts, or in any other way seek to influence editorial decisions. Editors who are approached in this manner must immediately notify OAP's Director of Publishing.

1.2.5    Confidentiality

Editors must treat all submitted manuscripts and all related correspondence as strictly confidential. Manuscripts must not be shared with any third party who is not involved in the peer review process for that specific manuscript. Editors must not upload any portion of a manuscript to any AI tool or external platform — see OAP's AI Policy for full requirements.

 

 

1.3     Handling Suspected Misconduct

Where an editor suspects research or publication misconduct in a submitted or published manuscript, including plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, duplicate submission, undisclosed competing interests, or manipulation of the peer review process, they must notify OAP's Managing Editor immediately. OAP will follow the relevant COPE flowchart and, where appropriate, will contact the corresponding author's institution, funding body, or other relevant parties.

Editors must not conduct their own independent investigation into suspected misconduct. They should gather and preserve relevant evidence and refer the matter to OAP's Managing Editor, who will coordinate the institutional investigation.

1.4     Proposing New Journals and Special Issues

Proposals for new journals, special issues, topical collections, or conversion of subscription journals to open access should be submitted in writing to OAP's Director of Publishing at info@oxfordap.com. All proposals are reviewed by OAP's editorial development committee. Proposers will receive a substantive response within thirty calendar days.

 

 

Oxfordshire Academic Publishing Journals Use