Overview

Editors play a critical role in safeguarding the scientific integrity of JATR. These guidelines define editorial duties, decision-making standards, and peer-review ethics in line with COPE Core Practices and ICMJE recommendations.

Editorial Mission: Ensure unbiased, ethical, and scientifically rigorous dissemination of addiction-related research.

Editorial Roles and Responsibilities

Assign reviewers with appropriate subject expertise and manage fair peer review.
Evaluate manuscripts objectively, based solely on scientific merit and originality.
Maintain confidentiality of manuscript content throughout review and production.
Prevent conflicts of interest from influencing editorial judgments.
Promote diversity in reviewer and author representation.

Decision-Making Principles

Editors must make decisions grounded in academic merit, supported by reviewer recommendations and journal scope. Key decision outcomes include:

Accept: Manuscript meets publication standards.
Minor Revision: Requires small corrections before acceptance.
Major Revision: Substantial revisions needed; re-review may be required.
Reject: Manuscript unsuitable for journal scope or quality standards.

Editors should provide constructive feedback regardless of the decision outcome.

Managing the Peer-Review Process

Select reviewers using the OJS reviewer database and subject taxonomy.
Ensure double-blind review integrity; remove author identifiers before dispatch.
Monitor reviewer timeliness and encourage balanced evaluations.
Mediate discrepancies between reviewer opinions.
Ensure transparent communication with authors while preserving reviewer anonymity.

Editors must verify that all reviews align with COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

Conflict of Interest and Recusal

Editors must recuse themselves from handling any manuscript in which they have a personal, academic, or financial interest. Alternative editors or guest editors should be appointed to maintain objectivity.

Ethical Oversight and Misconduct Handling

Editors are responsible for detecting and addressing ethical issues such as plagiarism, data falsification, or duplicate publication. Suspected cases must follow the COPE Flowcharts for Handling Misconduct.

Use plagiarism-detection software (iThenticate).
Initiate author correspondence with clear evidence.
Escalate unresolved cases to the Editorial Ethics Committee.
Document all actions transparently in the editorial system.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

Editors should ensure prompt correction of errors that affect the scholarly record. Actions include:

Publishing Errata for minor factual corrections.
Issuing Retractions for serious ethical breaches or unreliable data.
Adding Expressions of Concern for pending investigations.

Editorial Communication Standards

Respond to author queries within five working days.
Maintain courteous and professional correspondence at all times.
Use journal email channels for transparency and record keeping.
Document editorial decisions and reviewer comments within OJS logs.

Reviewer Selection and Acknowledgment

Editors should maintain a balanced reviewer database reflecting international expertise. Selection must be based on specialization, publication history, and ethical reliability.

Annual reviewer acknowledgments may be published to recognize contributions while maintaining anonymity of specific review assignments.

Editorial Training and Quality Assurance

All editors should undergo periodic training in publication ethics, data integrity, and COPE case-management procedures. The editorial office conducts internal quality audits every six months to evaluate adherence to policies.

Diversity and Inclusivity in Editorial Practice

Editors should strive for equitable representation across gender, geography, and research perspective. Bias or discrimination in editorial decisions is strictly prohibited under COPE diversity standards.

Post-Publication Engagement

Editors must remain available to address author or reader concerns post-publication. They should coordinate correction or retraction workflows in consultation with the publisher.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Can editors publish in JATR?

Yes, but submissions by editors are handled independently by another editor without involvement from the author-editor.

How should editors handle disputes?

Refer to COPE’s flowcharts for dispute resolution and involve the Publisher or Ethics Committee as needed.

Are editors allowed to act as reviewers?

Only if no conflict exists and full transparency is documented in OJS.

Editor's Guidelines