Editor Code of Conduct

Our publishing philosophy

As a global leader in research and education, Hindawi is committed to publishing content that advances knowledge, reflects diverse research areas and perspectives, and improves educational outcomes.

We hold firmly to the idea that disseminating research helps create a stronger and better-informed society. We facilitate the peer review of scholarly work, publish findings, and enable discovery and access to further inspire public debate so that others can test ideas and build on them.

Journal publishing is a team effort, and we work with researchers in their various roles as editors, peer reviewers and authors. We respect editorial independence and engage with all stakeholders to ensure that our publishing practices reflect the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. We are committed to promoting an inclusive environment for all stakeholders including editors, peer reviewers, authors and staff to enable the exchange of ideas and academic debate, recognizing that research and societal advancement depend on challenging our assumptions and biases.

Committee on Publication Ethics

All parties involved in journal publishing must work together to ensure that best editorial practices and standards of expected ethical behavior are maintained. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) have defined a set of recommended Core Practices that are applicable to all involved in publishing scholarly literature including editors and journal staff, publishers and institutions. As a member of COPE, Hindawi is committed to adhering to COPE guidance and to creating a culture of publication integrity.

Applicability of the Code of Conduct

This document outlines what is expected of an Editor and is applicable to all editors contributing to journals published by Hindawi as based on Hindawi’s guidance for Handling a manuscript, and COPE guidance.

Editors are expected to adhere to COPE’s Core Practices and Hindawi guidance on manuscript handling. The Publisher will work with the editors as appropriate to establish robust and well-described editorial policies for the journal to keep pace with the changing nature of the publishing landscape and best practices. COPE’s Core Practices provide guidance into the following areas: managing allegations of misconduct; authorship and contributorship; complaints and appeals; conflicts of interest; data and reproducibility; ethical oversight; intellectual property; journal management; peer review processes; and post-publication discussions and corrections. These topics are also explained in COPE guidance, A Short Guide to Ethical Editing for New Editors, which summarises the key principles, tasks and relationships of the journal editor role. Editors are editorially independent from the publisher.

Editors are expected to uphold a high standard of professional conduct and establish respectful relations with the diverse and global journal community including authors, peer reviewers, members of the editorial board, editorial office staff and publishing staff to ensure an inclusive, collaborative, respectful and safe working environment.

Hindawi promotes equal opportunities and treatment for all, and does not tolerate harassment, bullying, disrespectful behavior or discrimination of any form against individuals or groups based on racial or ethnic group, color, ancestry, national origin, religious creed, physical appearance, physical or mental disabilities, medical conditions, genetic information, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual identity, sexual orientation, marital status, military and veteran status, political affiliation, or any other category protected by law.

It is impossible to define every action, all words, or situations that could reasonably be interpreted as harassment, bullying, disrespectful or discriminatory behavior. We will focus on the impact of words and actions rather than intentions, and encourage the raising of any concerns as outlined in the final section of this Code of Conduct.

Hindawi’s commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) includes strategic efforts to foster an inclusive community and embed equitable practices and processes internally, as well as to actively support collective efforts, such as the Joint commitment for action on inclusion and diversity in publishing and the Coalition for Diversity & Inclusion in Scholarly Communications. We support a welcoming environment for all and strive to contribute positively to DEI in scholarly publishing.

We know that diverse perspectives offer new ideas, additional avenues of discovery and solutions to research problems, and improved scholarly communication. Further, addressing bias and expanding equity and inclusivity increases the likelihood that research will benefit more people and communities and reflect the diversity of research interests and perspectives that exists in the world.

Editors and all other stakeholders engaged in scholarly publishing have a shared responsibility to promote these values. This includes but is not limited to: working with the publisher to develop policies and processes that support an equitable and inclusive experience for all involved; supporting recruitment practices that foster diversity within journals’ editorial team, reviewer pool and authorship base; and, evaluating manuscripts based solely on research content. Additionally, Editors should remain aware of their own conscious or unconscious biases and seek out development opportunities to gain knowledge and skills needed to address bias in an appropriate, systematic manner and seek to adopt inclusive and equitable editorial behaviors and best practices.

Editors should adopt the peer review model that their journal uses and is aligned with best practices. The peer review model should be clearly described in the journal’s guidelines, including what manuscripts are peer reviewed and how peer review is conducted. Editors are expected to obtain at least two independent peer review reports for research manuscripts. In upholding this standard, handling Editors should generally not serve as peer reviewers. Editors and their journal teams are highly encouraged to take the Better Peer Review Self-Assessment to reflect on their current peer review processes and areas that may need improvement. Findings from journals that completed the self-assessment are shared here.

The Publisher will work with Editors to maintain consistent standards in peer review and manuscript handling processes across all submissions to uphold and record editorial actions.

Editors should not ask authors to add citations to their papers when there is no strong scholarly rational for doing so. It is also an Editor’s responsibility to intervene if a peer reviewer requests excessive or inappropriate self-citation. COPE have resources on citation manipulation and editing peer reviews to provide guidance on expected practices.

Editors should be mindful that manuscripts they submit themselves to the journal adhere to the independent peer review model adopted by the journal and are not handled directly or unduly influenced by the Editor as regards acceptance or publication.

Editors should ensure manuscripts are handled confidentially in accordance with COPE guidelines and the applicable terms and conditions agreed by the author upon submission (including the journal owner’s privacy policy and transfer network terms).

Editors should disclose any potential interests, both financial and non-financial, that might appear to affect their ability to objectively oversee peer review or undertake decision-making on a given submission. Financial conflicts of interest include funding from various sources such as advertising, government, or charitable or philanthropic institutions and relevant financial or employment interests (e.g., patent ownership, stock ownership, consultancies, or speaker’s fees). Non-financial conflicts of interest refer to personal relationships, personal (including competition or potential rivalry), political, or religious interests. A conflict of interest may also be present in situations where an Editor and submitting author have recently performed research together, sit in the same academic department, or have recently co-authored a research article. Editors should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts or adjudicating on specific integrity or ethic concerns where they have any potential or perceived conflicts of interest that may influence their ability to make unbiased editorial decisions or manage an unbiased peer review process. In these situations they should delegate responsibility for manuscript handling to another Editor.

The Publisher will work with the Editors as necessary to adopt editorial policies and processes that reduce research misconduct by fostering compliance with subject-specific research standards, guidelines and regulations as outlined here. Compliance with relevant research standards and research settings should be built into the submission, review and publication process, including but not limited to collecting, vetting (as appropriate) and publishing details of ethical approvals or waivers; collection of informed consent for studies involving human participants; compliance with appropriate research design protocols (e.g. protection for vulnerable groups); appropriate registration of clinical trials; approval for animal research; adherence to community reporting standards and sharing of data where appropriate.

Editors are obliged to follow-up on any research integrity and publishing ethics concerns raised openly or anonymously, directly or indirectly, during the peer review process or following publication and seek support in such instances from the journal team or publisher as necessary. The publisher will work with Editors to maintain the integrity of the work published in their journals and make any amendments (corrections, retractions etc) depending on the outcome of integrity investigations or regarding previous historical journal content where necessary. Editors are expected to follow the Publisher’s policy and process for handling appeals against editorial decisions.

If Hindawi discovers any instances where the Editor Code of Conduct has not been adhered to, we will conduct an independent investigation involving all parties to reach a resolution. For Hindawi journals, concerns should be raised with the journal team or directly to the research integrity team via [email protected]. Lack of adherence to the Code of Conduct may result in the termination of Hindawi’s engagement with the Editor.