You shall ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. You must select reviewers who have suitable expertise in the relevant field. You must review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest made by reviewers to determine whether there is any potential for bias.
Research articles that are sent to review must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and where necessary you should seek additional opinions.
You must follow best practice guidance provided by Elsevier on avoiding the selection of fraudulent peer reviewers (for example not using a reviewer recommended by an author unless you have verified that the reviewer’s contact information came from an independent source).
You must not attempt to influence the Journal’s ranking by artificially changing any Journal metric. In particular you shall not require that references to that (or any other) Journal’s articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons and authors should not be required to include references to your own articles or products and services in which you have an interest.
You should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
You must follow the editorial policies of the Journal in order to encourage transparency and complete, honest reporting, and to ensure also that peer reviewers and authors have a clear understanding of what is expected of them.
You shall use the Journal’s electronic submission system for all Journal communications and make appropriate use of Elsevier’s systems for the detection of plagiarism.
You must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the Supplement/Special Issue and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. Unless the Supplement/Special Issue is operating an open peer-review system or reviewers have agreed to disclose their names, you must protect reviewers’ identities.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in your own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Since peer review is confidential, reviewers must not share information about the review with anyone without permission from the editors and authors. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with Elsevier and the Journal Editor, you may share limited information with editors of other journals where deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct.
You shall apply Elsevier’s policy relating to the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers.
Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared to Elsevier in writing prior to your appointment, and then updated from time to time if and when new conflicts arise. Elsevier may publish such declarations in the Supplement/Special Issue.
You must not be involved in decisions about manuscripts which you have written yourself or which have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which you have an interest. Further, any such submission must be subject to all of the Journal’s usual procedures, peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups, and there must be a clear statement to this effect on any such manuscript that is published.
Articles authored by the Guest Editor
Unless specifically approved in writing by Elsevier and the Journal Editor, you may not submit more than one article to the Supplement/Special Issue and you agree not to be involved in decisions about any such manuscript(s), which shall be subject to all of the Journal’s usual procedures.
Vigilance over Published Record
You should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by cooperating with the Journal Editor if requested by the Journal Editor to review and assess reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer and editorial) in conjunction with Elsevier (or society, if applicable). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or article and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
If the Journal Editor is presented with convincing evidence of misconduct, you should coordinate with the Journal Editor and any other co-editor, Elsevier (and/or society, if applicable) to arrange the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction to the record, as may be relevant.