Editorial Independence

Editors must exercise independent judgment free from commercial, political, or institutional pressures. The ethical obligation to evaluate manuscripts fairly, without favor or bias, is a fundamental principle. Editorial independence reinforces trust in the journal and ensures that all decisions are grounded in scholarship, not external influence.

Integrity of the Scholarly Record

Editors are responsible for maintaining the integrity of the published record. This includes careful attention to corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern when needed. If evidence of misconduct arises, editors must investigate diligently and transparently, documenting their actions to provide accountability.

Example: If plagiarism is detected post-publication, editors must initiate a retraction process in consultation with COPE guidance.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received by editors must be treated as confidential documents. Editors should not share content with unauthorized individuals, except where disclosure is necessary for the peer-review process. Confidentiality extends to reviewers’ identities in double-blind review systems, protecting anonymity and fostering honest critique.

Conflict of Interest Management

Editors must declare any personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in such cases. The journal must provide transparent mechanisms for transferring editorial responsibility to another impartial editor.

Ethical Oversight of Research

Editors are expected to verify that submitted research complies with ethical standards for human and animal studies, clinical trials, and informed consent. They must ensure that manuscripts include details of institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee approval, as well as adherence to relevant international declarations such as the Helsinki Declaration.

Transparency in Decision-Making

Editors must document and communicate the rationale for editorial decisions. This includes providing authors with clear explanations for rejection, revision, or acceptance. Transparency builds trust and provides authors with constructive feedback for improving their work.

Respect for Diversity and Inclusion

Editors should promote inclusivity by encouraging contributions from underrepresented groups and ensuring diverse perspectives in editorial and reviewer selection. Editorial practices should avoid implicit bias and embrace equity in global scholarship.

Collaboration with Reviewers

Editors must work in partnership with reviewers, respecting their confidentiality and ensuring feedback is used constructively. Editors should mediate when reviewer recommendations conflict, applying balanced judgment to reach fair outcomes.

Commitment to Professional Development

Editors are encouraged to remain current with evolving ethical standards, open-access developments, and digital publishing innovations. Participation in COPE seminars, WAME workshops, and continuous training ensures editors maintain best practices.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What if an editor discovers they have a conflict of interest after starting work on a manuscript?
A: The editor should immediately declare the conflict and transfer the manuscript to another editor to maintain impartiality.

Q: How should editors respond to author complaints about perceived bias?
A: Editors must respond respectfully, review the case objectively, and document their decision process to ensure accountability.

Q: Can editors reject a paper without peer review?
A: Yes, if the manuscript is clearly out of scope, ethically non-compliant, or fails to meet minimum scientific quality standards.

Contact

For further guidance on editorial ethics, editors can contact:

• Email: info@hspioa.org
• Contact Form: https://www.pharmacyscijournal.com/contact