editorial
Definition
Editorial refers to the administrative and evaluative work performed by editors within academic publishing, encompassing manuscript assessment, reviewer coordination, and quality oversight of the peer-review process. At advances.in/psychology, the editorial function includes conducting desk reviews to filter submissions unlikely to meet publication standards after two rounds of revision, rating the quality of completed reviews on a sliding scale, and providing feedback to reviewers on how their assessments might improve. The editor-in-chief holds a two-year inaugural appointment, with provision for paid associate editors once workload exceeds individual capacity, and a consulting editor supports the editorial operation from the outset. Financial compensation for editorial work is a stated principle of the journal's publishing model, though the founding editor-in-chief works without pay during the inaugural period.
Sources: Kunst (2022)
Related Terms
- academic publishing (1 shared article)
- open-access (1 shared article)
- advances.in (1 shared article)
- sustainable (1 shared article)
Applications
Editorial and Peer Review
The editorial process at advances.in/psychology is directly tied to the financial and qualitative structure of peer review. Editors evaluate whether completed reviews meet predefined minimum quality requirements, score reviews on a sliding scale, and determine whether reviewers receive compensation, though the score itself does not affect payment. This arrangement is designed so that editorial oversight maintains review quality while the compensation system makes participation financially worthwhile for board members.
Sources: Kunst (2022)
Editorial and Open Science
Editorial policy at advances.in/psychology is aligned with Open Science standards, including adherence to the Transparency and Openness Promotion guidelines across citation practices, data and methods transparency, pre-registration, and replication. The journal also practices double-blind review to reduce documented biases in the evaluation process.
Sources: Kunst (2022)
