Responsibilities of Editors and Reviewer
Responsibilities and Duties of Editors
The general responsibilities of the editors of Chinese Journal of Nursing are listed below:
Decision on the Publication of Articles. The editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the Chinese Journal of Nursing should be published. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board subjected to such legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may consult with reviewers in making this decision.
Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit.
The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the manuscript while handling it in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author.
The editors should not hold conflicts of interest with authors whose work they are assessing, e.g. if they are from the same institution or collaborate closely. In this case the Editor-in-Chief or a suitable editorial board member will make final acceptance decisions for submitted papers.
The editors require skills of proofreading, copy editing, developmental editing, line editing and editing for search engine optimization.
It is the responsibility of the editor to reject a piece of writing that appears to be plagiarized or ghost written by another sub-editor. He should check that a particular piece is neither self-plagiarized, nor has been published before elsewhere.
Reviewer responsibilities
The responsibilities of the reviewer of Chinese Journal of Nursing are summarized as follows:
The reviewer should provide an honest, critical assessment of the research. The reviewer should not manipulate the process to force the authors to address issues interesting or important to the reviewer but peripheral to the objective(s) of the study.
The reviewer should maintain confidentiality about the existence and substance of the manuscript. It is not appropriate to share the manuscript or to discuss it in detail with others or even to reveal the existence of the submission before publication.
The reviewer must not participate in plagiarism. It is obviously a very serious transgression to take data or novel concepts from a paper to advance your own work before the manuscript is published.
The reviewer should always avoid, or disclose, any conflicts of interest. For example, if the reviewer has a close personal or professional relationship with one or more of the authors such that his/her objectivity would be compromised. Scientific merit should be the basis for all reviews.
The reviewer should accept manuscripts for review only in his/her areas of expertise.
The reviewer should agree to review only those manuscripts that can be completed on time. Sometimes, unforeseen circumstances arise that preclude a reviewer from meeting a deadline, but in these instances the reviewer should immediately contact the editor.
The reviewer also has the unpleasant responsibility of reporting suspected duplicate publication, fraud, plagiarism, or ethical concerns about the use of animals or humans in the research being reported.
The reviewer should write reviews in a collegial, constructive manner. This is especially helpful to new investigators. No one likes to have a paper rejected, but a carefully worded review with appropriate suggestions for revision can be very helpful.