Role: Student editor

Sunderland Journal of Law and Criminology Editorial Board Member

 

Role Description

The Editors, alongside the Editor in Chief, are responsible for the overall quality of the intellectual content of the journal and for overseeing, monitoring and ensuring the fairness, timeliness, thoroughness, and civility of the peer-review editorial process. The Editors are responsible for upholding the mission and scope of the journal and for selecting papers that provide new, original, and important contributions to knowledge.  

Editors are expected to attend meetings to discuss the scope of the Journal and the reviewer process. Peer-reviewers are chosen by the editors and it is the role of the editors to ensure that the reviewers understand the role of the review system, adhere to the deadlines for reviewing and are approachable and contactable in case any issues arise.  

All Editorial board members must obey the direction provided by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal. Every manuscript submitted for possible publication will be assigned with an Editor and if the manuscript is in the area of Editor’s research interest, it is expected that assigned Editor will take up the assignment at an earliest possible time. If he or she wants to deny the assignment due to some personal reason, that should also be informed to the Editor in Chief at the earliest possible convenience. Honesty and transparency is a must to become an Editorial Board member; an Editor should judge every submission equally and transparently.

 

Editorial Board Responsibilities toward Editor in Chief and University

1. Conducting peer review of submitted manuscripts – the final editing of the manuscripts.
2. Complying with the guidelines and procedures of the University, including any terms specified in the Code of Conduct of the Journal.
3. Making recommendations about improved evaluation and dissemination of research within the Schools of Law and Criminology.
4. Adhering to the policies of the Journal, at least in so much as they do not encroach upon editorial independence.
5. Adhering to the agreed-upon mission, publication practices, and schedule of the Journal.

 

Editorial Board Responsibilities toward Reviewers

1. Assigning papers for review appropriate to each reviewer’s area of interest and expertise.
2. Establishing a process for reviewers to ensure that they treat the manuscript as a confidential document and complete the review promptly.
3. Informing reviewers that they are not allowed to make any use of the work described in the manuscript or to take advantage of the knowledge they gained by reviewing it before publication.
4. Providing reviewers with written, explicit instructions on the journal’s expectations for the scope, content, quality, and timeliness of their reviews to promote thoughtful, fair, constructive, and informative critique of the submitted work.
5. Requesting that reviewers identify any potential conflicts of interest and asking that they recuse themselves if they cannot provide an unbiased review.
6. Allowing reviewers appropriate time to complete their reviews.
7. Requesting reviews at a reasonable frequency that does not overtax any one reviewer.
8. Finding ways to recognise the contributions of reviewers, for example, by publicly thanking them in the journal.
9. It is mandatory that every Editor treat each author with proper dignity, courtesy, fair behaviour irrespective of considering the matter and fate of the article.
10. Providing the final judgment on the articles assigned within the allotted time with proper reason and clarification should be done by the Editor.

1. Editorial Board members are responsible for timely publishing the accepted articles.

1. It is the Board’s responsibility to inform the selected reviewers that reviewers are not entitled to use the any part of the work in any form provided in the article they are reviewing. Reviewers should be also informed about the complete confidentiality of the assignments they are undertaking.

The Editorial Board have the responsibility to inform and educate readers. Making clear and rational editorial decisions will ensure the best selection of content that contributes to the body of legal knowledge.

  Editorial Board Responsibilities toward Readers and the Academic Community

1. Evaluating all manuscripts considered for publication to make certain that each provides the evidence readers need to evaluate the authors’ conclusions and that authors’ conclusions reflect the evidence provided in the manuscript.
2. Providing literature references and author contact information so interested readers may pursue further discourse.
3. Identifying individual and group authorship clearly and developing processes to ensure that authorship criteria are met to the best of the editor’s knowledge.
4. Requiring all authors to review and accept responsibility for the content of the final draft of each paper or for those areas to which they have contributed; this may involve signatures of all authors or of only the corresponding author on behalf of all authors.
5. Maintaining the journal’s internal integrity (e.g., correcting errors; clearly identifying and differentiating types of content, such as reports of original data, opinion pieces [e.g., editorials and letters to the editor], corrections/errata, retractions, supplemental data, and promotional material or advertising; and identifying published material with proper references).
6. Ensuring that all involved in the publication process understand that it is inappropriate to manipulate citations by, for example, demanding that authors cite papers in the journal.
7. Creating mechanisms to determine if the journal is providing what readers need and want (e.g., reader surveys).
8. Disclosing all relevant potential conflicts of interest of those involved in considering a manuscript or affirming that none exist.

 

Editorial Board Responsibilities towards the Public

Many responsibilities of editors toward the public are carried out through the mechanisms established for the processes and constituencies mentioned above. Editors’ roles have benefited society in many ways, from the quality-control measures taken when considering manuscripts for publication to requiring authors to abide by standards that would advance science and deposit information into freely available public databases as a condition of publication (e.g., data sharing). Editors are regularly taking steps to see that the outcomes of the scientific enterprise benefit the public.

 

Editorial Process   Editorial Freedom

To establish and maintain high-quality journal content, editors should be given responsibility for editorial decisions on individual manuscripts. The editors have the right to editorial freedom

Confidentiality

Editors and the publication staff should keep all information about a submitted manuscript confidential, sharing it only with those involved in the evaluation, review, and publication processes. Editors should consider adding a confidentiality notice to all correspondence, to reviewers, to serve as a reminder to authors, editors, and reviewers that confidentiality is imperative.

Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest in publishing can be defined as conditions in which an individual holds conflicting or competing interests that could bias editorial decisions. Conflicts of interest may be only potential or perceived, or they may be factual. Personal, political, financial, academic, or religious considerations can affect objectivity in numerous ways.

Editors should set and regularly monitor a conflict of interest policy for editors, reviewers, editorial board members, editorial staff, and authors. Editors should strive for fairness and impartiality in their policies. This can only be achieved if all parties involved in the peer-review process disclose any and all conflicts and allow the Editor in Chief to decide how they should be handled. Since the perception of conflict of interest is detrimental to a journal’s reputation, avoiding even the perception of conflict of interest should be a priority. Enforcement of these policies must also be considered: practices to deal with premeditated or inadvertent breaches of the journal’s conflict of interest policy should be stated in writing, regularly reviewed, and carried out consistently. Some specific types of conflict of interest are mentioned below.

• Personal Conflicts: Editors should avoid making decisions on manuscripts that conflict with their own interest, such as those submitted from close friendship groups. If they may have a perceived or actual conflict of interest, editors should delegate handling of any decision to other editors with decision-making responsibility. Also, editors should submit their own manuscripts to the journal only if full masking of the process can be ensured (e.g., anonymity of the peer reviewers and lack of access to records of their own manuscript).

Editorial Board Participation

The editor in chief should define the terms and roles of the editors and editorial board that are appointed by and report to him or her. As mentioned above, the editor-in-chief should require disclosure of any conflicts of interest. The editor in chief should ensure that the journal’s editors and editorial board are identified in the journal masthead; receive the necessary training and oversight to adequately perform editorial functions; and actively perform their responsibilities, such as assigning reviewers or reviewing manuscripts and advising on policy considerations.

Timeliness of the Publication Process

Editors are responsible for monitoring the turnaround time for every publishing stage from manuscript receipt to publication or rejection. Processing data and evaluating trends can help editors scrutinise acceptance and rejection rates of specific types of manuscripts and manage the inventory/backlog of accepted manuscripts. The editor’s responsibility for timeliness extends to providing prompt responses and decisions for all journal-related activities, including responses to authors’ queries.

Errata, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

Editors have a responsibility to maintain the integrity of the literature by publishing errata or corrections identifying anything of significance, retractions, and expressions of concern as quickly as possible. Errors in published articles require a published correction or erratum. Many online journals provide a direct link between the original article and the correction published later. Editors should monitor the number and types of errors that appear in their journals. This review can be done simultaneously with the evaluation of other journal statistics. Editors should take corrective measures when there is evidence of an increase in preventable errors.

Addressing Authorship Disputes

Editors are responsible for promoting the integrity of the literature and fostering good publication practices. Journals should develop and define the authorship in publication. Examples include submission of a manuscript without the knowledge or consent of an author/contributor, or misrepresentation of a contribution. Authorship shall be clear and checked with all individuals involved with the manuscript.

Considering Appeals for Reconsideration of Rejected Manuscripts

Despite editors’ best efforts to solicit fair and unbiased reviews to evaluate manuscripts fairly, and to make decisions that are in the best interest of the journal and its readers, authors may still want to challenge editorial decisions. Editors should have a policy in place to address complaints and help resolve these issues, although it is not easy to explain to an author that the research reported in his or her manuscript does not warrant publication in comparison with the many others under consideration.

These considerations will be taken at Editorial Board level and discussed amongst all members of the Editorial Board. The Editor in Chief will notify any students if issues arise in relation to acceptable manuscripts.

Addressing Allegations or Findings of Misconduct

Concerns of possible academic misconduct, per the University of Sunderland undergraduate/postgraduate regulations, should be passed directly to the Editor in Chief.

 

Editorial Board Personal Specification:

This document sets out the minimum and preferred requirements for potential editorial board candidates.  These requirements are used when shortlisting candidates, and any evidence of meeting these requirements is assessed from the candidate’s CV and covering letter.  When completing the covering letter, it is suggested that candidates refer to the requirements set out below.

 

 

Essential

Desirable

Qualifications

 

 

1

Must be enrolled on a Law or Criminology programme within the University of Sunderland.

*

 

2

Evidence of any certificates or awards relevant to the Programme of Study.

 

*

Experience and Knowledge

 

 

3

Have completed at least one traditional academic piece of written coursework.

*

 

4

Have completed an assessment such as a Dissertation, Journal Article or Case Commentary.

 

*

5

Have successfully passed one core module required for their relevant programme of study.

*

 

6

Have been a student representative, or sat at board level at a University or external society.

 

*

Learning and Research

 

 

6.

Effective communication style and interpersonal skills.

*

 

7.

Ability to conduct academic research in a chosen area of Law or Criminology.

*

 

8.

Ability to adhere to the assurance of academic quality and standards.

*

 

9.

Ability to develop and use effective, flexible and innovative approaches to academic research.

 

*

10.

Willingness to engage in quality knowledge/research construction and knowledge/research dissemination

 

*

Personal Development

 

 

11.

Able to build and manage fruitful relationships with contributors and colleagues.

*

 

12.

Open-mindedness and willingness to learn from other peers.

 

*

13.

Ability to manage time effectively.

*

 

14.

Ability to recognise and develop good writing in others.

 

*

 

Successful Candidates

Editor in Chief, Zach Leggett, will notify successful and unsuccessful students who have applied via their University of Sunderland student email address within three weeks of the application deadline.

Submission of the CV and covering letter will be awarded on meeting the requirements of the role profile and person specification above. Applications will be considered via a panel procedure consisting of the members of staff on the editorial board. If unsuccessful, the Editor in Chief, Zach Leggett, will provide feedback and how to improve. This will enable students to apply for the next round of editorial board applications in the following academic year.

Zach will arrange a session welcoming the students to the Sunderland Journal of Law and Criminology. This training session will be compulsory for those involved with the editorial board.

Students will be notified in their training of confidentiality and will have to sign a ‘Confidentiality Declaration’ and will receive a copy of the Journal’s Code of Conduct. Failure to comply with the Code will result in being removed from the post of a member of the editorial board.

Those students that have applied and been successful for the editorial board roles will receive regular updates and agendas to attend editorial board meetings.

The tenure of a member of the editorial board is for one issue only. If students enjoy the role and would like to be involved again, they will have to apply through the same process in the next academic year.

Depending on the amount of submissions received for possible publication, students will receive at least two manuscripts to oversee. Time for review will be considered alongside submission deadlines for student work on their respective Law and Criminology programmes.

Applications must be sent to Zach Leggett at lawjournal@sunderland.ac.uk by 5pm on Friday 12^th February 2024.