For Editors
Editorial Guide
This guide outlines the governance, workflow, ethical responsibilities, and quality expectations for editors working within DAPresses journals and hosted publishing programmes.
At a glance
Audience
Editors-in-Chief, Section Editor Leads, Associate Editors, Guest Editors, and Editorial Board members.
Focus
Editorial governance, manuscript handling, peer review, quality assurance, and collaboration with DAPresses.
Goal
Consistent, transparent, ethical, and high-quality editorial decision-making.
Support
Editorial operations and platform questions can be directed to info@dialogicsl.com.
1. Purpose of the Guide
Editors are intellectual and ethical stewards of journals hosted on DAPresses. This guide clarifies expectations around editorial responsibilities, governance, peer-review standards, collaboration, and publication quality.
2. Editorial Governance Structure
Required roles
- Dialogic Joint Editorial Board for strategic oversight
- Editor-in-Chief for final editorial decisions
- Editorial Board Members for review, advisory, and outreach work
- Associate or Managing Editors for workflow coordination
- Section Editors for subject-specific oversight
Editorial independence
- Decisions are based on scholarly merit
- Political or institutional pressure should not shape outcomes
- Peer review and conflict management must remain transparent
3. Core Editorial Responsibilities
- Uphold aims, scope, and editorial standards
- Maintain COPE-aligned ethical practice
- Enforce authorship, disclosure, and data transparency requirements
- Ensure academic rigor, originality, clarity, and methodological soundness
- Support interdisciplinary accessibility where manuscripts serve broad audiences
4. Manuscript Handling and Peer Review Workflow
Initial screening
- Check scope relevance and fit
- Review originality and plagiarism screening outcomes
- Confirm ethical compliance and basic readiness
- Reject unsuitable submissions early where appropriate
Peer-review management
- Select qualified reviewers
- Support timely and substantive review completion
- Request interdisciplinary reviewers where needed
- Guide authors through revision cycles clearly and consistently
Editorial decisions
- Base outcomes on reviewer reports and editorial judgment
- Communicate decisions with structured feedback
- Document decision-making transparently
5. Ethical Responsibilities
- Protect confidentiality of submissions
- Maintain fair and unbiased review and decision processes
- Manage conflicts of interest transparently
- Apply COPE-aligned standards in cases of concern
- Take a zero-tolerance stance on misconduct
6. Use of Generative AI
- AI use must be disclosed by authors
- AI may support language improvement but not generate research content
- Editors may request clarifications, raw data, or supporting evidence where concerns arise
7. Production and Publishing Responsibilities
- Review copyediting and proofreading outcomes
- Confirm metadata accuracy
- Approve final proofs where required
- Check that figures, tables, and references are publication-ready
- Support DOI and release readiness
8. Special Issues, Visibility, and Collaboration
Editors may propose special issues, appoint guest editors, and help strengthen journal visibility through calls for papers and international contributor engagement.
- Special issues must follow the same ethical and quality standards as regular issues
- Indexing readiness depends on consistent schedules, metadata quality, and editorial performance
- Editors are expected to collaborate with DAPresses on platform operations, policy updates, and performance reviews
9. Institutions, Societies, and Continuous Improvement
Editors working with institutional or society journals are expected to maintain active boards, promote journal visibility, encourage contributions, and uphold ethical standards.
Editorial processes should be reviewed regularly to support quality improvement, policy development, and discoverability.