sign in sign up
<<
Home , Peer review

Peer review best practices and policies Contents

Introduction 3 Working with SAGE Publishing 3 Using this guide 3 About SAGE Publishing 3 SAGE’s commitment to responsible publishing 4

Your role as Editor 6 What you can expect from SAGE 6 What SAGE expects from you 6 Dignity at work 7

Managing peer review 8 Your journal’s peer review policy 8 Selecting reviewers 8 Peer review best practice 9 Rewarding reviewers 10 Working with guest editors 10

Editorial and publishing polices 11 policies 11 SAGE’s publishing policy 11 Publication ethics and practices 12 Correcting the academic record 14

Important links and resources 15 Introduction

As the Editor of a SAGE Publishing journal, you play a key role in the advancement of knowledge and understanding in your field. SAGE, as the world’s leading independent academic publisher, is a values- driven organisation, focused on the selection, shaping, curation and dissemination of high quality research outputs; your work as Editor is obviously central to what we do.

Our key philosophy is to ensure quality, Working with About SAGE Publishing transparency and integrity across our and in everything we SAGE Publishing Since publishing our first journal in publish. The publishing industry is an Your Publishing Editor is responsible 1965, SAGE has grown to become the increasingly complex environment. for managing your journal within SAGE. world’s largest independent academic Factors such as the pressure on If you are ever unsure about who to journal publisher. SAGE is still led by researchers and academics to publish, contact at SAGE regarding a specific its founder, Sara Miller-McCune, who gaps in training provided to early career query, contact your Publishing Editor has put provisions in place for SAGE to researchers and in the in the first instance. We believe journal remain independent for at least 99 years understanding of what research integrity publishing should be a partnership: after her lifetime. means can result in us sometimes having between SAGE, our Editors, and the SAGE believes passionately that engaged to deal with cases of misconduct in the Societies and Associations on whose scholarship lies at the of a healthy peer review or publishing process. We behalf we publish. We would like to society and that education is intrinsically want to ensure that you have the support work collaboratively with you in to valuable. This means playing a creative and guidance you need to navigate any make the most of your expertise in your role in disseminating research and situations that may arise. Maintaining the field and our experience as publishers. turning information into knowledge. The reputation of our journals, and protecting Please raise any concerns or problems cornerstones of our publishing philosophy the reputations of our Editors and you encounter – especially those related are creating and retaining great, long- publishing partners, is of the greatest to potential legal or ethical matters – at term relationships; a sharp focus on our importance to us. the earliest opportunity so that we can markets and their needs; and an ability to We understand that different disciplines work to resolve them together. combine quality and innovation. and fields of research may have different More information about our history, approaches to broad publishing issues but Using this guide values and publishing programs can we wanted to provide some information be found on our website here on SAGE’s general publishing and In this guide we set out some key aspects ethical policies and what we consider to of working with SAGE as a journal be best practice in publishing. Editor, advice on managing the peer review process in the most transparent SAGE is committed to: and ethical way, information on our • Maintaining the editorial editorial and publishing policies and an independence of journal Editors. overview of potential issues that might • Supporting our Editors in running arise during the publication process, with their journals ethically and guidance on how to handle these. transparently. We also invite you to refer to the SAGE • Maintaining an accurate and Editor Gateway on our website. transparent academic record, including publishing retractions and corrections when necessary.

3 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies SAGE’s commitment to SAGE and Commercial sales responsible publishing SAGE has been actively engaged with The Commercial Sales team at SAGE Publication ethics the open access (OA) debate from handles all non-subscription revenue very early on and is a member of the derived from non-academic/industry SAGE, as a publisher member of the Open Access Scholarly Publishers sponsors who wish promote relevant Committee on Publication Ethics Association (OASPA). All our OA products or educational . (COPE), supports and abides by the publishing is held to the same very high SAGE operates all transactions with COPE Core Practices. COPE has a standard as our traditional publishing the utmost regard to transparency and wealth of information and resources activities. employs strict ethical to that may be accessed on their website: ensure that opportunities are handled publicationethics.org. If your journal is SAGE supports both gold OA publication with complete integrity. Society and/ a member of COPE you should have log- and green OA archiving: or editor approval is sought wherever in details that will allow you to access • SAGE is the only major publisher that necessary, and we uphold the principle further useful resources, including allows authors in any subscription that industry support must have no e-learning modules, in the members journal to post the accepted version influence over editorial decisions section. SAGE strongly encourages all of of their article on their own personal regarding the selection of content in our our Editors to take advantage of COPE website, their department website journals. Commercial revenue streams membership, so if your journal is not a or with no for some journals include sales of article member you can ask your Publishing embargo. Click here for more reprints, translated article reprints, print Editor to arrange this for you. information about the details and online advertising, sponsorship of SAGE is also an active member of STM, of green open access archiving abstracts, supplements, local the leading global trade association for allowed by SAGE editions and bulk subscriptions. academic and professional publishers, • SAGE Choice, our gold hybrid Reprints and supports its International Ethical OA option, is offered on almost all Reprints of individual articles are often Principles for Scholarly Publication of SAGE’s subscription journals purchased by industry sponsors and and allows authors to make their distributed to potentially interested Legislative and regulatory published article freely available for parties for educational and promotional compliance an article processing charge of 3,000 purposes (e.g. at conferences). At SAGE, It is of paramount importance that we at USD/1,600 GBP for most journals. we ensure that editorial and advertising SAGE, and you as Editor, comply with This is often paid by the author’s administration is clearly separated. all relevant laws in the performance of funder or institution and we have a We insist that articles are reprinted in services for our journals e.g. maintaining number of centralized deals directly unabridged form, entirely unchanged the privacy of personal and confidential with universities. from the final published version (unless data and complying with anti-SPAM • SAGE’s pure gold OA journals a correction is published). Reprint legislation. We may occasionally are supported by article processing sales are only made after submission, communicate with you regarding charges, institutional sponsorship review, acceptance and publication of new developments in legislation and and/or SAGE. All the papers these articles, thereby not affecting editorial regulations that may be applicable journals publish are freely available to decision-making. Articles that may later to your work on the journal. Please readers. be sold as reprints will have undergone contact your Publishing Editor at any For the most up-to-date OA information, the same peer review process as time with any questions you may have please visit the access other submissions to the journal, and about compliance. website: uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/ authors will have included all required open-access-at-sage statements and declarations on conflicts of interest, funding sources etc. If you have any questions about any aspect of open access publishing please contact your Publishing Editor.

4 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies Supplements Advertising Publishing sponsored supplements SAGE provides clear terms and creates additional content, may capture conditions to advertisers, which stipulate articles in hot or new scientific areas and that they must be authorized to sell all increases visibility for a journal. They can products and/or services advertised and take many forms, from proceedings of to use any information or depiction in the meetings or industry satellite symposia, ad material/advertising; that they have to groups of related papers that are the right to use any trademarks, service often commissioned especially for marks or trade names depicted in the the supplement and then printed and ad material/advertising; and that the bound together. Supplements are also ad material/advertising complies with published online on SAGE Journals all applicable laws and regulations in alongside the normal journal issues. the country where it will be seen.

SAGE is often approached by companies Statements made in advertising wishing to create and sponsor a copy should be ethical and contain supplement for a particular journal. We no direct or implied disparagement make it very clear to all supplement of another product. There should be sponsors that will not proceed without no statements that are misleading, the explicit pre-approval of the journal exaggerated or contrary to proven editor. All supplement content then facts. All advertisements must needs to follow the same peer review clearly and prominently identify the process as regular articles and be advertiser, and recruitment ads must be held to the same standards as regular nondiscriminatory and comply with all issues. Whilst the editor may agree to applicable laws and regulations. appoint a guest editor to oversee the Acceptance and placement of solicitation and review of supplements, advertising in our journals is entirely ultimate decision-making on all papers separate from the editorial content. rests with the editor. Ads that appear on the journal website adjacent to articles must display randomly, and cannot display based on the subject matter of the article.

Advertising interests will not influence editorial decisions or editorial control of the journal. Editors and societies are asked to approve new advertisements where necessary.

5 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies Your role as Editor

At SAGE we value very highly the role our Editors play. As Editor you will be driving your journal forward: ensuring that it is publishing high quality research, meeting the needs of its readership, and ensuring that it is responding to developments within the discipline or field of study. As your publisher, our aim is to support you and your Editorial Board by providing information and advice on all publishing matters, and especially any issues that could affect the quality and ethical standing of the journal.

SAGE Publishing is committed to If you are new to the role of Editor, you What SAGE expects being an inclusive organization where may find the COPEShort guide to all individuals are treated equally with ethical editing for new editors useful, as from you fairness and respect, regardless of age, well as their Core Practices guidelines. We ask our Editors to: disability, gender identity, marriage We ask our Editors to ensure their • Maintain quality, transparency and partnership status, pregnancy and actions are aligned wherever possible and integrity in what is published: parental responsibilities, race, religion with COPE guidelines, and encourage publish the best quality content and belief, sex, or sexual orientation. you to discuss any queries or concerns possible for the journal, uphold the We trust that, as Editor, you will uphold with your Publishing Editor. highest standards of peer review, these values, and we can support you and ensure that editorial decisions in developing and implementing diversity Commitment to editorial are taken following thorough by suitable peers and policies. COPE has produced a podcast independence on diversity and inclusivity in peer review, revision where necessary. The independence of our Editors to which we recommend listening to. • Maintain and promote consistent select and publish content for their ethical policies for their journals. journal is something we strongly uphold • Oversee and act to enforce those What you can expect and maintain. policies as needed in a fair and consistent manner. from SAGE Publishing your own research in • Judge each submission on its At SAGE we promise: the journal own merits and not exclude authors • Expert support from your Publishing You may wish to publish your research in based on their previous publication Editor on all aspects of managing your own journal and this is acceptable, history. your journal. provided that you are not involved in • Ensure the confidentiality of the • Advice on the strategic the decision-making process for these review process. of your journal: we will help you attract papers. We recommend including a • Uphold the integrity of the peer and publish high quality content. Visit note about the process for reviewing review and publishing process and the SAGE Editor Gateway for more submissions from the journal’s Editorial not i) require authors to cite the information and useful resources to Board within your guidelines for authors, journal as a condition of publication, help you attract and publish the best in order to ensure complete transparency. ii) suggest unnecessary self-citation. papers in your journal. • Ensure that reviewer comments • Support and advice on developing Being a member of other journal sent back to authors are fair, your Editorial Board: as Editor, it Editorial Boards unbiased and constructive and do is important for you to develop an We appreciate that you will probably not contain discriminatory or other Editorial Board that reflects a range of sit on the Editorial Boards of other offensive language. Remember that subject expertise in the field, is gender journals in your field. We ask that if reviews can be edited before being balanced and is geographically attending meetings or discussing journal returned to authors. and ethnically diverse. We are very matters with colleagues to please keep • If you are handling a happy to provide guidance should information and data relating to SAGE and decide to provide a review of you need it, and of course will be and your journal confidential. We do that manuscript yourself, ensure happy to implement changes to your consider acting as an Editor (i.e. in an this is done transparently, as per Editorial Board to ensure that it is truly Editor-in-Chief capacity) on a directly COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for representative, and all members work competing journal to be a conflict of Peer Reviewers. as a team to help you manage and interest. Please talk to your Publishing develop the journal. Editor if you have any queries or • Exercise the highest standards of • Support and guidance on matters of concerns about this. personal integrity in their work as publication policy and ethics; advice Editor of the journal, recognizing and on how to deal with suspected planning for instances where they publication misconduct. could have a competing interest or the appearance of a competing interest.

6 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies • Work with authors, reviewers, work, that all who participated are Working with your reviewers and Editorial Board members credited and have given consent We ask reviewers to: as necessary to ensure they are for publication, and that others are • Provide their expert, objective sufficiently advised regarding their acknowledged appropriately. assessment of the manuscript, journal’s ethics and publishing • Contact the Editor regarding and provide fair, unbiased, and policies and that the journal’s any changes in authorship that constructive comments where stewardship on ethical matters is fair, may be required either before or possible. unbiased and timely. after publication. Please let your • Return their referee report in the • Maintain an Editorial Board that Publishing Editor know of any format requested and in a timely reflects the various disciplines in the disputes around authorship. Details manner. field and is international,gender of our process for handing these • Take responsibility for declaring any balanced and ethnically diverse. can be found in the section on conflicts of interest that could affect authorship disputes below. the impartiality of their reviewing and Working with your authors • Contact the Editor to identify decline to review where appropriate. We ask authors publishing in SAGE and correct any material errors If your journal uses ScholarOne journals to: upon discovery, whether prior or Manuscripts, this is typically captured • Read and abide by the journal’s subsequent to publication of their as part of the invitation to review. manuscript submission guidelines. work. If an author contacts you • Maintain the confidentiality of the Please work with your Publishing about making changes to their peer review process. Editor if you feel these are less published article, please inform than fully transparent, clear your Publishing Editor. More • Abide by COPE’s Ethical Guidelines or accurate. information on SAGE’s policy in terms for Peer Reviewers • Only submit papers that are original, of correcting the academic record can their own work, and that have not be found in the section on Publication Dignity at work been submitted concurrently to any ethics and practices below. We strongly support dignity at work, and other journal. • SAGE requires the author as the do not tolerate harassment or bullying • Adhere to all research ethics rights holder to sign a Journal of our staff or others. We consider guidelines of their discipline, Contributor’s Publishing Agreement harassment to be a form of conduct, particularly where human or animal for all articles we publish. The speech or behavior which makes subjects are involved, and include corresponding author is asked to someone feel distressed, humiliated or relevant declarations and statements warrant that they are authorized to threatened. It could take place in any confirming such. Details of what is sign on behalf of themselves and, in setting and be conducted through any required by your journal can be found the case of multi-authored papers, form, including electronic communication. in your submission guidelines. on behalf of all other authors. SAGE’s • Ensure any real or apparent Journal Contributor’s Publishing We consider bullying to be offensive, conflicting or competing interest is Agreement is a licence agreement intimidating, malicious or insulting clearly stated on submission of their under which the author retains conduct, speech or behavior which paper (this would include funding copyright in the work but grants makes someone feel vulnerable, upset assistance). SAGE the sole and exclusive right or threatened. and licence to publish for the full • Ensure their data is true and not We trust that you uphold these principles legal term of copyright. Exceptions manipulated, that it is their own or and apply the same principles to working may exist where assignment of that they have permission to use data with Editorial Board members, authors copyright is required or preferred reproduced in their paper. and reviewers in your role as Editor. by a proprietor other than SAGE. In • Where material is taken from this case copyright in the work will other sources (including their be assigned from the author to the own published writing) the source society. The contributor agreement is clearly cited and that where includes details of what the author is appropriate permission is obtained. permitted to do with their article; this • Ensure their work does not infringe information can also be found within on any rights of others, including the copyright and permissions privacy rights and intellectual pages on the SAGE Journal Gateway. property rights. Please note that an article cannot • Comply with the stated authorship be published in the journal without criteria, including accurately a contributor agreement. If we do representing the authorship of the not have the signed contributor’s paper, ensuring that all individuals publishing agreement at proof credited as authors participated correction stage, we will not proceed in the actual authorship of the to publication.

7 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies Managing peer review

High quality peer review is at the heart of any . Whilst not infallible, and much-debated, it remains the mainstay of academic publication evaluation and is generally seen as an essential component of the process.

Sense About has produced If your journal uses ScholarOne Recommended reviewers should not be a short guide to peer review that may Manuscripts you will be able to keep assigned to a paper if: be of interest to journal editors. Aimed track of reviewers’ areas of expertise • The recommended reviewer is based at early career researchers, it explains by asking them to add keywords to at the same institution as any of the how peer review works and outlines its their profile if( you use a pre-defined co-authors. various limitations. It also includes useful list of keywords it is a good idea to • The recommended reviewer is based information on the different types of peer review these regularly to ensure they at the funding body for the paper. review. Download Peer Review: The are current – ask your Publishing Editor nuts and bolts from their website. if you need any advice on this), see the • The author has provided a personal number of times they have been asked (e.g. Gmail/Yahoo/Hotmail) email to review and, if you use ScholarOne’s account for the recommended Your journal’s peer rating system, see the speed and quality reviewer and an institutional email review policy of their reviews. account cannot be found after performing a basic Google search Your journal’s peer review policy Tips for expanding your (name, department and institution). should be stated on your submission guidelines. It should be clear what type reviewer Advice on using recommended of peer review is used (e.g. single-blind, • Ask your Editorial Board to nominate reviewers colleagues who might be willing double-blind etc.) and if peer review The vast majority of authors and support your journal as a reviewer. varies depending on the article type (e.g. reviewers act with great integrity, and editorials and letters might not be sent • Check the reference list in the we are enormously indebted to them. for external review). It is also important submitted paper to find authors However, there are those who seek to state if not all articles are sent for peer of related work who could act as to abuse the peer review process and review, for example if they fall outside the reviewers. provide false reviewers in order to journal’s scope or the editor deems them • Approach your own authors who have positively influence editorial decisions to be of insufficient quality to be sent previously published papers in the on their paper. Given the very significant out for external review. It is also good same area, though please be aware of potential consequences, we would practice to include an indication of the any potential conflicts of interest. also like to help you in reducing your likely timeframe for reaching decisions. • Include early career researchers in journal’s exposure to any unscrupulous your search who may be keen to start practices that may exist. We suggest that SAGE Language Services reviewing – supporting inexperienced you might consider the following steps Where an article looks scientifically reviewers will build loyalty and ensure to minimize risk to yourself and your promising but is poorly written, you may better quality reviews. journal, as follows: wish to advise authors to withdraw and • Search relevant databases and • Watch out for extremely rapid re-submit after having their paper read by repositories e.g. , review or reviews that recommend a colleague, particularly if English is not , PubMed. acceptance without providing their . SAGE offers a fee- sufficient detail or specific feedback. based English-language editing service Recommended and opposed • Watch out for duplicate reviews for authors wishing to improve the reviewers language, presentation and formatting of (i.e. identical reviews from two Some journals offer authors the their manuscripts. Visit SAGE Language different reviewer identities for the opportunity to suggest reviewers Services for more information. same manuscript). who they believe would be well- • Best practice would suggest placed to comment on a manuscript that decisions should not be (recommended) or highlight reviewers Selecting reviewers made solely on the basis of who they believe would not be suitable recommended reviewers, and Sourcing and securing the services to review a paper (opposed). that at least one reviewer sourced of good reviewers is perhaps the Recommended reviewers should be independently be used on each paper. most difficult aspect of managing the experts in their fields and should be able peer review process. It is important to provide an objective assessment of to maintain a sufficient pool of expert the manuscript. reviewers to enable submissions to be reviewed quickly and competently.

8 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies • Be particularly wary of using non- Peer review best Reaching a final decision institutional email addresses that In general, SAGE strongly recommends include numbers or additional letters, practice obtaining two independent external e.g. FIRSTNAME.SURNAMEb@ reviews that have addressed the address or INITIAL.SURNAME152@ Turnaround times paper in detail, though in practice the address Time to first decision can be a major number of reviewers you use may vary • Some individuals have verified factor for authors deciding where to depending on your field, the particular ORCID accounts which can be found submit their paper. The turnaround topic being discussed and the quality at www..org times considered to be competitive by of the manuscript (i.e. a borderline authors will vary by discipline, but your If a recommended reviewer does not manuscript may require a third – or fourth Publishing Editor can work with you to have an institutional email address, and – opinion). Where two or more reviewers find ways to optimize the time to first you are concerned about a reviewer’s have made conflicting suggestions as decision for your journal. authenticity or would like to perform a to how the paper could be improved, spot check, you might wish to follow the you can guide the author as to which steps below: Reviewer feedback you consider to be most important. Providing clear guidance to reviewers Whilst the peer review process can • Search for the reviewer’s name and will improve the quality of their feedback, support your decision-making, you are institution to find their institutional giving you greater support in making not obliged to follow your reviewers’ email address. editorial decisions and providing a recommendations. • Search for the reviewer’s email better service for your authors. Some That said, it is very important that address in a search engine: a fake journals will supply a form for reviewers the comments authors receive email address will not be registered to complete; others ask reviewers to address the paper’s content in depth, anywhere and is unlikely to appear in comment on particular aspects of the providing constructive criticisms of results. paper. You might ask your reviewers to the methodology, the research and • Search for the reviewer’s publication consider the following: its presentation, as well as any other history; is this email address used • Is the paper original? suggestions or observations that might as their corresponding email for their help them in carrying out a revision. publications? If not, contact the • Is the paper clearly written? If the reviews are insubstantial, focus email address they have published • Is it methodologically sound; is the solely on spelling/grammar or raise any with and use this when inviting them author’s theory or argument credible? other cause for concern, a further review to review. • Does the paper adhere to appropriate should be sought. • For reference, here is a list of ethical guidelines? internet country codes and top-level • Are described clearly The journal’s peer review policy is domains and domain extensions: enough for others to replicate? specified in the submission guidelines. en..org/wiki/List_of_ • Does it have results which are For transparency and in light of Internet_top-level_domains clearly presented and support the increased public interest in the peer conclusions? review process, Editors may wish to Please remember that you are under no • Does it correctly reference previous include provenance statements in obligation to invite any recommended relevant work? published articles (e.g. “Provenance: not reviewers (or to avoid inviting any ‘non- commissioned; externally peer reviewed • Does it make a sufficiently novel preferred reviewer’) for any paper. by two reviewers”), especially if the peer contribution to the field to warrant review of a particular manuscript differs publication in your journal? from the stated policy. Please liaise with • If the paper is not suitable as your Publishing Editor if you wish to submitted, is it worth developing? implement these statements. Please visit the SAGE Reviewer Gateway to see the sort of things you should be expecting a reviewer to be considering in their review. Your Publishing Editor can work with you to optimize the reviewer feedback for your journal.

9 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies For revised manuscripts, if the Working with guest • They will make final suggested changes are minor and if, on recommendations on decisions reviewing the revision against previous editors to you as journal Editor; you reviewer comments, you as the Editor Publishing special/themed issues or will make final decisions on the feel that your own concerns and the supplements can enhance the profile articles. concerns of the reviewers have been of your journal, attract new authors • They will liaise with the SAGE addressed to your satisfaction, it is not and submissions, and potentially boost Production department on required that you send the revision back usage and citations. Many journal editors sending accepted manuscripts out to reviewers for comment. By only will arrange for a guest editor to handle for copyediting and typesetting. sending revisions back out to reviewers the issue on their behalf. Below are some Your Production Editor can where you feel it is absolutely necessary suggestions on managing special issues supply a production schedule for you can help reduce reviewer fatigue or supplements and working with guest the special issue; the guest editor and also keep turnaround times down to editors. will need to manage the process a minimum. according to the dates advised. • Appointing a guest editor: they • If they do not comply with the Communicating your final decision to should be a specialist in the chosen ethical and quality standards of reviewers is good practice and helps subject, and ideally will be sufficiently the Journal, or the production foster a sense of loyalty and community. well-networked internationally to schedule, this may result in the bring top authors to the journal. postponement or rejection of They should also be well-organized the special issue. Rewarding reviewers and have time available to lead the • Contact your Publishing Editor Reviewers make a significant project through to completion. at the start of the process contribution to the publishing process • Developing a proposal: ask your and they can provide a written that often goes unrecognized. SAGE guest editor to summarize the agreement (signed by SAGE and supports a range of initiatives that rationale for the issue, the approach the guest editor) setting out roles acknowledge reviewers’ support: they envisage taking and the areas and responsibilities in order to they wish to cover. The proposal • Many journals feature a ‘thank you formalize the arrangement. should ideally include a list of to reviewers’ list in the final issue of proposed paper topics and potential • Peer review: whilst articles in special the volume to give their reviewers authors. You may like to consult your issues are often commissioned, some public recognition. Talk to Editorial Board before agreeing to the they must still be peer reviewed in your Publishing Editor if you would proposal with the guest editor. The accordance with your journal’s policy. like to include a ‘thank you to guest editor may wish to publish Your submissions system must reviewers’ in your journal. some of their own research in the be used to handle guest-edited • It is also worthwhile, when revising special issue. Please make it clear special issue submissions. Please the composition of your Editorial to them papers they are authoring let your Publishing Editor know Board, to ‘promote’ prolific reviewers must be dealt with independently about any forthcoming special issue to the Board to formally acknowledge and be subject to the same titles before papers are solicited, their contribution. peer review process as all other so that they can set up a dedicated • SAGE supports , a submissions to the journal. submission category (having the issue title available to select at submission third-party service that enables • Roles and responsibilities: ensure stage makes it easier for the SAGE reviewers to claim credit for your guest editor is aware that: completed reviews. Anyone can Production Editor to identify and • They are responsible for create an account and submit details batch these papers for publication). managing the peer review of of their reviews, which Publons articles submitted for the special will independently verify. Ask your issue in accordance with the Publishing Editor if your journal is not journal’s and SAGE’s policies currently integrated with Publons for and processes. this to be set up. • They should ensure the complete • In recognition of the invaluable role and full peer review of all that reviewers play in the peer review articles, reviewing peer reviewer process, SAGE offers all reviewers comments, communicating 60 days free access to all SAGE necessary changes to the Journals as well as a discount of contributor and assessing final 25% on SAGE each time they contributor changes before final submit a review. decision making. • More information and additional resources are available on the SAGE Reviewer Gateway

10 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies Editorial and publishing polices

Research ethics policies SAGE’s publishing We will not generally republish material because: i) it potentially sends signals Editors and publishers have a key policy to our subscribers and readers that the role to play in protecting the integrity SAGE will not publish any article without journal is not attracting enough material of scientific and academic research. receipt of an accompanying approved of sufficientquality , ii) in an environment Misconduct can seriously harm the and signed SAGE Contributor Agreement where most material is available research community: prior to the publication deadline. electronically, previously published material tends to already be available • It can cause a general loss of trust in It is not our standard policy to publish journals and research. so the need for it to be made ‘more material in our journals that has been accessible’ diminishes and iii) citation/ • It can damage people’s careers, previously published elsewhere, except attribution considerations: republication including those of innocent parties, in translation. of material means that the same article for example co-authors who will exist with multiple bibliographic may not have been aware of any Previously published records, which can cause confusion and unethical behaviour of the submitting material dilute citations. author and journal editors whose reputations may become tarnished • Articles that have appeared in by association. another journal (or a ) in the Translations • It can damage institutions’ same, or substantially the same In some cases it may be desirable to reputations. form, are considered to have been publish in English an important article previously published. This applies • It can corrupt the evidence by that has previously been published in whether the journal is print or perpetuating false data and findings. another language. This is acceptable online, whether it is open access or under SAGE’s publication policy, at • It is a waste of time, effort and funds. subscription-based. the discretion of the journal Editor. It There are also wider considerations: • Articles that have appeared on should be made clear to the authors • Public policy and practice may be a commercial website or on any that they are responsible for clearing any based on fraudulent research. public website not run by either permissions needed (and paying any • Patients might be at risk if the author and/or the author’s relevant fees) to enable us to publish the recommendations based on institution, and that appear in the translation both online and in print. We fraudulent research are followed. same or in substantially the same need a special contributor agreement • Funding fraudulent research is a form as submitted to the journal, are to republish material in a SAGE waste of taxpayers’ money. considered to have been previously journal, so please discuss this with published. This applies whether the your Publishing Editor who can supply SAGE requires authors to comply with website is paid for or free to access. the correct licence. all relevant ethical procedures set out • Articles that were previously by their institutions and funding bodies, presented at conferences are and operate with complete transparency unlikely to be identical to the version with regards to how the research was being presented for publication, conducted, sources of funding, conflicts but those that are the same of interest, participant consent etc. or substantially the same and These requirements are set out in full were published in the conference on the Editorial Policies page of the proceedings (whether online or SAGE Journal Gateway and should also in print) would be considered to be included in your journal’s submission have been previously published. guidelines. Breaches in these ethics If they were not published in the should be investigated by the institutions conference proceedings or posted involved and the journal Editor should on the conference website and only work with SAGE on taking the necessary presented at the conference, then steps to correct the academic record they would not be considered to where necessary. have been previously published.

11 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies Publication ethics and SAGE takes issues of copyright different languages. If material has been infringement, or other previously published it is not generally practices breaches of best practice in publication acceptable for publication in a SAGE Editors should uphold the highest very seriously. We seek to protect the journal, as per our publishing policy standards of rights of our authors and we always outlined above. However, there are ethics to ensure the accuracy of the investigate claims of plagiarism or certain circumstances where previously publication record and promote integrity misuse of published articles. Equally, published material can be considered in academia. Broadly, the ways in which we seek to protect the reputation for publication: of the journal against malpractice. ethics could be breached fall under the • Abstracts and posters presented Submitted articles may be checked following categories: at conferences: though authors with duplication-checking software. should inform the Editor and • Plagiarism: presenting another Where an article, for example, is found acknowledge the first source of person’s ideas as if they were to have plagiarized other work or publication. Articles that have been his or her own, without proper included third-party copyright material presented at a conference but acknowledgement or attribution. without permission or with insufficient not published by the conference • Copyright infringement: presenting acknowledgement, or where the organizers may also be considered. another person’s original work of authorship of the article is contested, we The author should confirm that he/ authorship – their expression of reserve the right to take action including, she has not granted the conference ideas – as if it were his or her own, but not limited to: publishing an erratum organizers a licence to the work; if without proper acknowledgement or corrigendum (correction); retracting the author retains all the rights in the or attribution. the article; taking up the matter with work the journal editor may consider • Duplicate (or redundant) publication: the head of department or dean of the article for publication based copying and re-publishing his or the author’s institution and/or relevant on the fact that articles presented her own work without reference to academic bodies or societies; or taking at a conference are unlikely to be previous publication. appropriate legal action. the same or substantially the same • Data fabrication/falsification. We follow COPE’s flowcharts to help us version as that being accepted by • Inappropriate attribution of resolve issues of publication misconduct. the journal. authorship, which may lead to • Raw data (i.e. this does not include disputes (including individuals who Plagiarism and copyright the arrangement or organisation of have not contributed to an article data) and clinical trials registries (i.e. or excluding authors who have infringement without accompanying context). contributed, lack of acknowledgment We ask authors as part of the Please note that permission may still of guest or ghost authorship). submission process to warrant that be required to re-use these materials. • Misconduct within the publication they are submitting their original work, • Most dissertations and theses process (for example authors that they hold the rights in the work, posted in institutional archives. submitting manuscripts under and that they have obtained and can Please be aware that some fraudulent names or with fraudulent supply all necessary permissions for dissertations will be composed of affiliations or reviewer misconduct the of any copyright works previously published peer reviewed during the peer review process). not owned by them. If your ScholarOne system includes iThenticate, you can articles. If the dissertation being You may findthis article published use this to check the submission against presented for publication is the in Medico-Legal Journal (published papers published in journals using same or substantially the same as by SAGE, and featured in one of CrossRef (all major publishers use this previously published work, it will not COPE’s regular newsletters) of interest reference-linking service). If you need be suitable for a SAGE journal. You in describing some of these issues of help with using iThenticate please speak will need to determine whether the publication ethics in more detail: to your Publishing Editor. submission is sufficiently novel. We encourage our Editors to develop Ritesh G Menezes, Smith Giri, If you suspect or are made aware policies for their journals about what Sadip Pant, Magdy A Kharoshah, of possible plagiarism, consult the they consider to be acceptable Mohammed Madadin, and relevant COPE flowchart and talk to practice in this regard and indicate Sharath Burugina Nagaraja, your Publishing Editor. this in their submission guidelines. Publication ethics Med Leg J • Working papers or versions of December 2014 82: 155-158, Duplicate publication the paper posted on a pre-print first published on June 27, 2014 We also ask authors to warrant that server (where appropriate for the doi:10.1177/0025817214526524 they are submitting the work for first discipline). Again, journals should The article is free to view, so please publication in the journal, that it is have established policies about do also pass it along to colleagues not being considered for publication what they consider to be acceptable who may find it useful. elsewhere, and has not already been practice and should indicate this in published elsewhere in the same or their submission guidelines. As Editor

12 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies you retain editorial independence Data fabrication and Misconduct within the in regard to consideration of such falsification publication process papers. Authors should alert you If you suspect or are made aware Peer review misconduct when submitting their paper if they that data in a submitted or published have posted it on a pre-print server. In recent years a number of journal article has been falsified, consult the Authors should not post an updated publishers, including SAGE, have been relevant COPE flowchart and talk to version of their paper on the pre-print affected by attempts to defraud and your Publishing Editor. server while it is being peer reviewed circumvent the peer review system, for possible publication in the specifically by abusing the preferred or journal. If the article is accepted for Authorship disputes recommended reviewer functionality. publication, the author may re-use We set out our policy on what Whilst such instances relate to a very their work according to the journal’s constitutes authorship on the Editorial small proportion of the scholarly research self-archiving policy: SAGE’s Policies page of the SAGE Journal system, the potential impact on a standard self-archiving policy can be Gateway. All journals must also include journal’s reputation is significant. If your found on our Author Gateway an authorship policy within their journal uses recommended reviewers, submission guidelines. We recommend please be alert to potential abuse by In all cases the author should disclose that all contributors who do not meet the following the steps described in the any prior publication or distribution criteria for authorship should be listed in above section on managing the peer to the Editor and ensure appropriate an Acknowledgements section. review process attribution to the prior distribution and/or publication of the material. Sometimes disputes around who should If you suspect or are made aware of be included or excluded as authors any misconduct within the publication Co-publication and can arise either during the submission process, talk to your Publishing Editor. secondary publication process or after publication. We Citation manipulation In certain limited cases, namely where recommended considering the following there is deemed to be a public health to help manage authorship disputes: Attempts to manipulate Journal Impact Factors by deliberately increasing the interest, an article may be jointly or • If your journal uses ScholarOne number of self-citations are unethical. simultaneously published in more than Manuscripts, the system can be Some level of self-citation is to be one journal with the agreement of the set up so that all listed authors are expected but editors or reviewers should author and editors. copied in on correspondence. under no circumstances ask authors • Require authors to supply statements Secondary publication, for example to cite their journal in their submitted outlining their specific contribution of government or organizational paper unless it is relevant to the work (e.g. X designed the study, Y guidelines, may be acceptable if there is being considered and will be useful collected data, X and Y wrote the a compelling reason to make the article to the journal’s readers. Please be paper and gave final approval for available to your journal’s audience. aware that Thomson Reuters measures publication). Please see the ICMJE levels of self-citations and will exclude • Ask authors to supply ORCID IDs Recommendations on Overlapping journals from their databases if they to remove ambiguity around their Publications for more guidance and consider these levels to be excessive. identity. information. If your journal is co- We recommend reviewing Thomson publishing an article, SAGE can prepare • Use SAGE’s Authorship Change Reuters’ journal selection process, a special licence agreement to be signed Request Form (ask your Publishing which includes some information on by the relevant parties. Editor) to document any self-citation. amendments to the author list. Articles using previously published data, In the same way, citation ‘stacking’ by images or results should clearly identify If you would like to consider any ‘citation cartels’ (i.e. a group of editors or and give full reference to the original of these initiatives for your journal, board members agreeing to add citations publication. please talk to your Publishing Editor. to each other’s journals) is unacceptable and should not be tolerated. If you suspect or are made aware of You may also find COPE’s guidelines on duplicate or redundant publication How to handle authorship disputes: in your journal, consult the relevant a guide for new researchers useful. COPE flowchart and talk to your Please alert your Publishing Editor if Publishing Editor. any issues arise around authorship and check the relevant COPE flowchart

13 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies Correcting the Expressions of Concern academic record When an article is published in an An Expression of Concern may be issue (or an Open Access article is first published if, for example, we are made In an effort to better serve our published), it is considered the Version aware of possible research or publication researchers, librarians, and others in the of Record. SAGE is committed to misconduct by the authors and a academic community, SAGE believes preserving the integrity and transparency lengthy investigation is likely. The COPE clarity in the publishing record is a critical of the Version of Record. If a significant Retraction Guidelines outline a few component of information distribution. error is discovered, SAGE may publish more examples. Recognizing a published article as a an erratum or corrigendum notice to alert finalized ‘Version of Record’ establishes all readers. Retractions the expectation that it can be relied upon as accurate, complete, and citable. SAGE SAGE takes issues of copyright As members of COPE, SAGE follows the defines this Version of Record as the infringement, plagiarism and other COPE Retraction Guidelines. An article article paginated in a volume and issue breaches of best practice in publication may be retracted under the following or the initial article publication for open very seriously. In the rare cases where a circumstances: breach of publication ethics or copyright access journals (Open Access journals do • There is clear evidence that the infringement are discovered, SAGE not publish any additional versions such findings are unreliable, due to reserves the right to take appropriate as paginated issue/volume versions). misconduct (e.g. fabrication of the action to correct the academic record, data) or an honest error on the part of including but not limited to: publishing Corrections prior to the the author. an erratum or corrigendum; publishing Version of Record • The findings have previously been an expression of concern linked to published elsewhere (i.e. cases of Because articles can be read and cited the article; retracting the article and redundant publication). as soon as they are published (including publishing an accompanying retraction OnlineFirst publication), any changes notice; or removing an article for legal • The findings or reporting of the thereafter could potentially impact reasons and replacing the removed findings have been plagiarized. those who read and cited the earlier article with a notice. • The research has not been version. SAGE provides authors with conducted in accordance with the an opportunity to proofs Errata/corrigenda relevant ethical procedures. prior to publication with the express goal In the case of a major error being of ensuring accuracy of the content. Removal discovered, we will attach an an erratum or corrigendum erratum (to correct a mistake by us) or SAGE upholds the International increases the likelihood readers will find corrigendum notice (to correct a mistake Association of Scientific, Technical out about the change and also explains by the author) detailing the correction and Medical Publishers (STM) the specifics of the change. to the online version of the article. guidelines on the Preservation of the When an article is published OnlineFirst This notice will also appear in the next Objective Record of Science and we but not yet published in an issue, available print issue. Where an author’s will not withdraw the article unless legally limited corrections may be made at the name has been misspelled, we will required to do so, i.e.: discretion of the journal and SAGE. provide a duplicate bibliographic record • The privacy of a research subject has on the online version of the journal, so been inappropriately violated. that readers searching for the article will • The article contains errors that be able to find it using either spelling. would result in a risk to the general public if followed. • The article makes defamatory comments about others or their work.

14 | Peer review best practices and publishing policies Important links and resources SAGE Journal Gateway homepage uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/resources-for-journal-authors-and-editors

SAGE Editor Gateway uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/page/journal-editor-gateway

SAGE Author Gateway uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/journal-author-gateway

SAGE Reviewer Gateway uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/journal-reviewer-gateway

SAGE Open Access uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/open-access-at-sage

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) publicationethics.org

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) www.icmje.org

Council of Science Editors www.councilscienceeditors.org