For Editors
Open editor guidance and editorial role information.
Open Page
Editor FAQ
Editorial Questions and Answers for Responsible Academic Publishing
A practical FAQ resource for journal editors, editorial board members, guest editors and academic editors covering editorial responsibilities, manuscript screening, peer review, ethics, conflicts, decisions, special issues, metadata and post-publication record care.
Editorial Help Desk
One FAQ Hub for Editorial Responsibility, Review Quality and Integrity
Editors need clear answers at every stage of the publication process. This page brings together common editorial questions on screening, reviewer handling, ethics, decision letters, metadata, special issues and post-publication concerns.
The answers are written for practical editorial use and should be read with the publisher’s peer review, ethics, integrity, editorial process and governance pages.
64Editor FAQs
8FAQ categories
10.65919DOI prefix
Editor Integrity Notice
Good Editorial Work Protects the Journal Before and After Publication
Editors should protect academic quality, editorial independence, confidentiality, fair review, ethical decision-making and the accuracy of the final publication record.
Screening
Review
Ethics
Metadata
Smart FAQ Filter
Search Editor FAQ
Editor Quick Actions
Important Pages for Editors
Editorial Process Policy
Read editorial screening, review and decision process policy.
Open PagePeer Review Policy
Understand reviewer handling and peer review expectations.
Open PagePublication Integrity
Check integrity framework for ethics and record care.
Open PageFor Reviewers
Share reviewer guidance with peer reviewers.
Open PageEditorial Board Application
Route for editorial board interest and applications.
Open PageReviewer Application
Invite suitable experts to apply as reviewers.
Open PageContact Publisher
Contact the publisher for editorial support.
Open Page
FAQ Categories
Browse Editor FAQ by Topic
Editorial Role and Responsibilities
Questions about editor duties, editorial independence, decision responsibility and academic conduct.
Manuscript Screening and Initial Checks
Questions about initial screening, scope, completeness, originality, declarations and desk rejection.
Peer Review and Reviewer Handling
Questions about reviewer selection, confidentiality, reviewer comments, recommendations and review delays.
Publication Ethics and Integrity
Questions about plagiarism, authorship, conflicts, ethics approval, consent, data, AI-use and misconduct concerns.
Editorial Decisions and Author Communication
Questions about editorial decisions, revision letters, rejection, acceptance, author queries and status communication.
Special Issues, Guest Editors and Collections
Questions about special issue roles, guest editors, topic proposals, conflicts and quality control.
Production, Metadata, DOI and Indexing
Questions about production, article metadata, issue records, DOI status, Google Scholar readiness and indexing claims.
Post-publication Issues
Questions about corrections, retractions, withdrawals, complaints, appeals, certificates and record preservation.
Full Editor FAQ
Editorial Questions and Answers
Role
Editorial Role and Responsibilities
Questions about editor duties, editorial independence, decision responsibility and academic conduct.
What is the role of an academic editor?
An academic editor helps assess manuscript suitability, protect editorial quality, manage peer review where applicable, evaluate revisions, apply journal policies and support responsible publication decisions.
Does an editor guarantee publication?
No. An editor should never guarantee acceptance before screening, review, revision and editorial assessment. Decisions must remain policy-based and evidence-based.
Who makes the final publication decision?
The final decision may be made by the editor, editorial office, chief editor or designated editorial authority according to journal policy and publisher workflow.
Can an editor accept a paper only because the author paid a fee?
No. Editorial decisions must not be controlled by publication fee, payment pressure, personal request or institutional pressure.
What should an editor do if a manuscript is outside scope?
The editor may recommend rejection, transfer suggestion, return before review or author clarification according to journal scope and policy.
Should editors directly edit the author’s manuscript language?
Editors may suggest language improvement, but they are not required to rewrite the manuscript. Substantive editing should not alter the author’s scholarly responsibility.
Can an editor publish their own paper in the same journal?
Editor-authored submissions require conflict handling, independent editorial oversight and transparent separation from the editor’s own decision role.
What is editorial independence?
Editorial independence means decisions are based on scope, quality, originality, ethics, review and publication readiness, not improper influence, payment or pressure.
Screening
Manuscript Screening and Initial Checks
Questions about initial screening, scope, completeness, originality, declarations and desk rejection.
What is manuscript screening?
Manuscript screening is an initial check for scope fit, file completeness, author details, originality risk, ethics declarations, references and publication route suitability.
Is screening the same as peer review?
No. Screening is an initial editorial or administrative check. Peer review is deeper expert evaluation where applicable.
Can a manuscript be rejected at screening stage?
Yes. A manuscript may be rejected or returned before review if it is out of scope, incomplete, unethical, duplicate, low quality or unsuitable for the route.
What should editors check before sending a manuscript to reviewers?
Editors should check scope, article type, completeness, author metadata, ethical declarations, possible plagiarism, language readability and reviewer suitability.
Should editors check author affiliations?
Yes. Editors or the editorial office should check whether affiliations are complete, plausible and consistently presented in the manuscript metadata.
What if the manuscript has missing declaration statements?
The editor may ask the author to provide missing declarations such as ethics approval, conflict of interest, funding, consent, AI-use or data availability.
Can a manuscript be sent to review with poor formatting?
Minor formatting issues may be corrected later, but severely incomplete or unreadable submissions should usually be returned for correction before review.
What if the manuscript appears AI-generated or contains fake references?
The editor should treat this as an integrity concern and may ask for clarification, verify references or follow the AI-use and publication integrity policies.
Review
Peer Review and Reviewer Handling
Questions about reviewer selection, confidentiality, reviewer comments, recommendations and review delays.
How should editors select reviewers?
Reviewers should be selected based on subject expertise, availability, ethical reliability, absence of conflicts and ability to provide constructive feedback.
Can one reviewer be enough?
The number of reviewers depends on journal policy, article type, editorial assessment and availability. Some decisions may require more than one expert opinion.
What if reviewers disagree?
The editor should evaluate the reasoning behind each review, may seek another review and should make a balanced decision based on evidence and policy.
Should reviewer identity be disclosed?
Reviewer identity should be handled according to the journal’s peer review model and confidentiality policy.
What should editors do if a reviewer is late?
The editor or editorial office may send a reminder, extend the deadline, invite another reviewer or proceed with available evidence according to policy.
Can reviewers recommend acceptance or rejection?
Yes. Reviewers may recommend an outcome, but the final decision remains with the editorial authority.
What if a reviewer makes rude comments?
Editors should not pass abusive, discriminatory or unprofessional comments to authors. The editor may edit tone or request a revised review.
Can editors use AI to summarize reviewer comments?
Editors must not use AI tools in ways that breach confidentiality, expose manuscripts or produce unreliable decision summaries.
Ethics
Publication Ethics and Integrity
Questions about plagiarism, authorship, conflicts, ethics approval, consent, data, AI-use and misconduct concerns.
What should an editor do if plagiarism is suspected?
The editor should document the concern, check available evidence, avoid unsupported accusations and follow the plagiarism and publication integrity policies.
What is duplicate publication?
Duplicate publication occurs when substantially the same work is submitted or published more than once without proper disclosure, permission or justification.
How should authorship disputes be handled?
Authorship disputes should be handled carefully with author confirmation, contribution evidence and policy guidance. Editors should avoid making unsupported personal judgments.
What if ethics approval is missing?
For research requiring ethics approval, the editor should request documentation or clarification before review, acceptance or publication.
What if a conflict of interest is disclosed?
The editor should evaluate whether the conflict can be managed, requires disclosure, needs independent handling or affects review and decision processes.
What if data seems fabricated?
Editors should treat fabricated or unreliable data concerns seriously, request clarification where appropriate and follow research data and integrity policies.
Can editors reject a paper for ethical concerns?
Yes. Serious ethics concerns can justify rejection, withdrawal, correction, retraction or further investigation depending on publication stage.
What if AI use is undisclosed?
The editor may request disclosure, correction, verification of references and confirmation that authors take full responsibility for the manuscript.
Decision
Editorial Decisions and Author Communication
Questions about editorial decisions, revision letters, rejection, acceptance, author queries and status communication.
How should editors write a decision letter?
A decision letter should clearly state the decision, key reasons, required revisions, deadline where applicable and next steps for the author.
What is minor revision?
Minor revision is used when a manuscript is generally suitable but needs limited changes such as wording, references, formatting or clarification.
What is major revision?
Major revision is used when the manuscript has potential but requires substantial improvement in method, analysis, literature, structure or response to concerns.
Can an editor reject after revision?
Yes. Revision invitation does not guarantee acceptance. If concerns remain unresolved, rejection may be appropriate.
Should editors explain rejection reasons?
Yes. Rejection should be communicated respectfully with clear academic or policy-based reasons where possible.
Can an editor accept without review?
Only where journal policy allows editorial assessment without external review for the specific article type. Otherwise review should follow policy.
How should editors handle angry author emails?
Editors should remain professional, refer to decision reasons and policy, and escalate to complaints or appeals routes if needed.
Should editors promise fast publication?
No. Editors may provide estimated timelines but should not promise fixed publication dates where review, revision or production may vary.
Special Issues
Special Issues, Guest Editors and Collections
Questions about special issue roles, guest editors, topic proposals, conflicts and quality control.
What is a special issue?
A special issue is a theme-based collection of scholarly works focused on a specific topic, field, emerging area or academic event.
Can guest editors make final decisions?
Guest editor authority depends on journal policy. Final oversight should remain under the journal or publisher’s editorial governance.
Can special issue editors invite papers?
Yes, but invitations must not guarantee acceptance. Invited manuscripts should still follow screening, ethics and review policies.
What if a guest editor has a conflict?
The conflict should be disclosed and the manuscript should be handled by another suitable editor or editorial authority.
Can conference papers become special issue articles?
They may be considered if expanded, original, properly disclosed and handled according to journal, ethics and duplicate publication policies.
Should special issue deadlines override quality checks?
No. Deadlines should not override peer review, ethics, originality, metadata accuracy or editorial independence.
Can special issue topics be changed after announcement?
Minor clarifications may be possible, but major changes should be transparently communicated and aligned with journal scope.
How should special issue quality be protected?
Quality can be protected through clear scope, qualified editors, conflict control, reviewer selection, policy compliance and transparent decisions.
Metadata
Production, Metadata, DOI and Indexing
Questions about production, article metadata, issue records, DOI status, Google Scholar readiness and indexing claims.
What should editors check before production?
Editors should check final title, author names, affiliations, abstract, keywords, references, declarations, license, issue details and final decision status.
Does acceptance automatically mean DOI assignment?
No. DOI assignment depends on publisher policy, publication route, metadata readiness and final record preparation.
Can editors promise Google Scholar indexing?
No. Editors should not promise Google Scholar inclusion, Google ranking or external database indexing.
What is metadata quality?
Metadata quality means accurate and consistent title, authors, affiliations, abstract, keywords, DOI status, issue details, dates, pages and citation information.
Can author metadata be changed after publication?
Genuine metadata errors may be corrected through documented correction or metadata update process.
What is version of record?
Version of record is the official published version maintained by the publisher as the authoritative publication record.
Should editors verify references?
Editors are not required to verify every reference manually, but suspicious, fake, irrelevant or broken references should be flagged.
Can a certificate replace article metadata?
No. Certificate may support a record where applicable, but article page, DOI status, issue/archive record and metadata remain primary.
Post-publication
Post-publication Issues
Questions about corrections, retractions, withdrawals, complaints, appeals, certificates and record preservation.
What if an error is found after publication?
The editor or publisher should evaluate the error and determine whether correction, metadata update, expression of concern or retraction is needed.
When is retraction considered?
Retraction may be considered for serious unreliability, plagiarism, fabricated data, unethical research, duplicate publication or major misconduct.
Can authors withdraw after publication?
Published records are not normally removed simply on request. Withdrawal or removal depends on policy and seriousness of the reason.
How should complaints be handled?
Complaints should be documented, reviewed respectfully and handled through the complaints and appeals policy.
Can an editor ignore post-publication concerns?
No. Genuine concerns should be acknowledged and assessed according to policy and available evidence.
What if an institution asks for verification?
Verification should use official article pages, archive records, DOI where applicable, certificate verification and publisher communication.
Can publication dates be changed after publication?
Publication dates should reflect the true record. Corrections may be made only for genuine errors with documentation.
Who handles legal or serious misconduct queries?
Serious misconduct, legal or institutional issues should be escalated to the publisher or designated authority according to policy.
Editor Checklist
Practical Editorial Checklist
Editors Should
Responsible Editorial Actions
✓
Check whether the manuscript fits journal scope and article type.
✓
Check whether author names, order, affiliations and corresponding email are complete.
✓
Check whether abstract, keywords, references and declarations are present.
✓
Identify possible plagiarism, duplicate publication or AI-generated reference concerns.
✓
Check whether ethics approval, consent or data statement is required.
✓
Declare and manage conflict of interest before handling a manuscript.
✓
Select reviewers based on expertise, independence and confidentiality.
✓
Write decision letters clearly, respectfully and with policy-based reasoning.
✓
Do not promise acceptance, DOI, indexing, ranking or publication date.
✓
Escalate serious ethics, authorship, data or legal concerns to the publisher.
✓
Ensure accepted papers move to production with accurate metadata.
✓
Support corrections or post-publication updates through documented policy routes.
Editors Must Avoid
Editorial Risk Areas
!
Accepting a paper only because of payment or personal request.
!
Guaranteeing publication before editorial assessment or review.
!
Handling a manuscript where there is an undisclosed conflict of interest.
!
Sending manuscripts to reviewers without scope or ethics screening.
!
Passing abusive reviewer comments directly to authors.
!
Promising Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, indexing or ranking.
!
Changing publication dates or metadata without genuine reason.
!
Ignoring plagiarism, fake references or authorship concerns.
!
Using confidential manuscript content for personal benefit.
!
Uploading confidential manuscripts into unsafe AI tools.
!
Bypassing journal policy for special issue or invited papers.
!
Deleting published records silently without policy reason.
Important Editorial Notice
FAQ Guidance Supports Editorial Work, But Does Not Replace Policy
Editors should use this FAQ together with official journal policies, publisher governance, peer review policy, publication ethics, publication integrity and editorial process guidance.
!
FAQ answers should not be used to bypass editorial policy.
!
Editorial roles do not guarantee personal publication benefits.
!
Editors should not make false claims about indexing, DOI, ranking or acceptance.
!
Serious integrity concerns should be escalated through official publisher routes.
Connected Pages
Read These Pages with Editor FAQ
For Editors
Editor role, responsibility and editorial process guidance.
Open PageEditorial Services
Editorial support, workflow and publishing service overview.
Open PageAdvisory and Governance
Publisher governance and editorial independence framework.
Open PagePeer Review Policy
Reviewer selection, confidentiality and peer review process guidance.
Open PagePublication Integrity
Integrity framework for plagiarism, authorship, corrections and record care.
Open PageFor Reviewers
Reviewer guidance, responsibilities and review-quality expectations.
Open Page
Editorial Pathway
Connected Editorial Publishing Route
This page is part of the UnivColl Publications editorial ecosystem. Editorial guidance, advisory roles, reviewer responsibilities, conflict declarations, appeals and policy routes are connected so that decisions remain transparent, documented and independent.
Editorial Independence
Understand decision safeguards.
Open PageEditorial Misconduct Handling
Review how editorial concerns are handled.
Open PageReviewer Guidelines
Connect FAQs with reviewer expectations.
Open PagePublication Ethics
Read ethical publishing standards.
Open PageEditorial Independence
Editorial decisions should be based on scope, originality, ethics, review quality and publication readiness, not payment, pressure or personal influence.
Publication Ethics
Editors, reviewers and authors are expected to follow transparent ethical standards, conflict disclosure, confidentiality and correction pathways.
Metadata Ready
Editorial actions support accurate article records, author information, issue placement, DOI-ready metadata where applicable and long-term discoverability.
No False Promise
No editorial page, application, payment, review invitation or support response guarantees acceptance, indexing, citation, ranking, impact factor or third-party listing.
Responsible References
External Guidance Links
These external references are provided as general scholarly publishing guidance. They do not imply membership, endorsement, indexing or guaranteed publication outcomes.
Next Step
Continue the Editorial Journey
Use the next action according to your role. Editors may review policies or apply for editorial involvement, reviewers may use reviewer guidance, and authors may use the submission and appeal pathways.