Editorial Board: Role and Responsibilities: University Journal of Society


Editorial Board

Role and Responsibilities:

The basic role of the editorial board is to take final decisions for the publication of received articles. The editorial board will also be responsible for producing the editorial. The editorial board will be responsible for the decision for the publication of the articles. Their decision will be final and binding by the review committee. However, in practice, the comments and suggestions of the review committee will always be considered before publication.

Review Board

Role and Responsibilities

The role and responsibility of the review board are very simple and clear that they have to review the article blindly for publication. They have to review the article in terms of ethics, methodology, facts, analysis, research orientation, and suitability of the publication. They need to comment on the article if they feel that the article needs some improvement, clarification, or more facts to make the subject clear. They also need to correct their language, structure and syntax, if they feel like doing so, or if the article needs it. And finally, they have to make a remark on whether this article is suitable for publication or not.

Policy on Name Reviling of the Reviewer

Since the University Journal of Society is a double-blind peer-reviewed research journal, we are bound to not disclose the personal identity of the reviewer, to maintain the same.

Conflict or Ethics Arises During Peer Review

The University Journal of Society has a well defined and documented policy for every step of publishing the content. The University Journal of Society is handling all contents carefully after receiving them. But the mishandling of the content or breaching of ethics is possible because of human nature, not because of the policy of the University Trust, the University Journal, or the University Journal of Society. Since the University Journal of Society is a double-blind peer-reviewed research journal, we are bound to not disclose the personal identity of the reviewer, to maintain the same. However, if the editorial board finds that it is necessary to reveal or need to discuss with the content creator/ author and reviewer, then the peer reviewer’s identity can be revealed. The Editor-in-Chief is authorized to reveal the name of peer-reviewed only in the interest of academics in the extreme situation. For nominal things, the matter can be assigned to the other reviewer or the editorial member or the group of editorial members, as required. If any ethics have been breached by the reviewer, the content creator/ author can approach the Editor-in-Chief. In this situation the Editor-in-Chief will have three options, (1) solve the matter from his/her level, (2) matter referee to the Editorial Board, (3) matter referee to Ethics and Complain Committee, however, the content creator/ author has right to approach Ethics and Complain Committee. Any decision taken by the Editor-in-Chief can be referred to or challenged in the Editorial Board and Ethics and Complain Committee. The decision taken by the Editorial Board and/ or Ethics and Complain Committee will be final and binding on everyone. All such subject(s), issue(s) and complaint(s) must be in the knowledge of the Governing Body. This is the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief to inform all such subject(s), issue(s) and complain(s) to the Governing Body regularly. It is very clear that the Editor-in-Chief has no option to choose which subject(s), issue(s) and complain(s) have to report to the Governing Body or not.

Document ID: UJS/2108/BoardEditorial


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here