The Editors-in-Chief are responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the Journal of the Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijić” SASA will be published. They are guided by the policies of the Journal and constrained by legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
The Editors-in-Chief must hold no conflict of interest regarding the articles they consider for publication. If they feel that there is likely to be a perception of a conflict of interest in relation to their handling of a submission, the selection of reviewers and all decisions on the paper shall be made by the Editorial Board. The Editors-in-Chief have a responsibility to protect the anonymity of reviewers and/or Authors as per the highest academic standards. They shall evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content free from any racial, gender, sexual, religious, ethnic, or political bias. The final decisions on the accepted manuscripts are presented to members of the Editorial team by the Editors-in-Chief. The decisions were previously made according to received peer-reviews, their expertise, and objective judgment on selected acceptable papers.
Editorial team / Associate Editors' responsibilities
In recognition of Associate Editors' scholarly reputation and fine contributions, as well as their prior and continued commitment to the Journal, any member of the Editorial Team requires to be involved in the review process for selected papers at the invitation of the Editors-in-Chief. In addition, the Editors-in-Chief will seek to match the papers with AE areas of expertise, although they may also occasionally ask you to review a paper outside your research areas if they anticipate that AE can contribute in a meaningful way. The Editors-in-Chief will be mindful of keeping the workload for a board member as manageable as possible, and fully understand that the quality and reputation of the Journal are built on the volunteer service of its editorial board members. The key responsibilities of Associate Editors are outlined below:
1. Timely completion of the review requests. Two to four weeks are commonly required to return a review.
2. Quality reviews. The overall goal of the review process is to provide authors with a constructive (not judgmental) critique and suggestions from you that the authors can use to improve their work, thus ensuring it is of the highest standard possible for consideration for publication in the Journal. Being clear, specific, and candid is valuable in your review comments. The constructive feedback is intended to help authors to improve their research, and the tone any member of the team use should be encouraging, respectful, and nurturing at the same time. All research, regardless of its merits by reviewer assessment, is conducted and prepared by authors with considerable time and effort.
3. Be the Journal ambassador. As a member of the Editorial team, it is expected from each member to take a part as the Journal ambassador to promote the publication, engage authors, reviewers, and readers, and encourage quality submissions and review contributions to the Journal.
4. Support (or not) the final decisions of Editors-in-Chief made according to received peer-reviews, their expertise, and objective judgment on selected acceptable papers.
A Publisher is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenues have no impact or influence on editorial decisions. The Publisher may assist in communication with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to the Editors-in-Chief. The Publisher is working with other publishers and associations in order to set standards for best practices on ethical matters, errors, and retractions. The publisher is prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.