Editorial Hub

For Editors

InformedLens Journals

Shaping Scholarship at InformedLens Journals

InformedLens Journals editors sit at the heart of each journal's mission - advancing rigorous, original research. Whether you are joining as an Editor-in-Chief, Section Editor, or Guest Editor, your role directly shapes the quality, diversity, and impact of what we publish.

This page explains how editorial roles work at InformedLens Journals, what we expect of our editors, and why serving on our editorial board is a meaningful contribution to your scholarly community.

1. Editorial Structure

InformedLens Journals operates a structured editorial hierarchy designed to ensure every manuscript receives expert, impartial, and timely handling. Each role carries defined responsibilities within the double-blind peer review process.

Role	Responsibilities	Time Commitment
Editor-in-Chief (EIC)	Overall editorial leadership; final acceptance decisions; strategic direction; quality assurance; policy development; public representation of the journal.	Approximately 6-10 hours per month
Associate Editor / Section Editor	Handling assigned manuscripts end-to-end - desk screening, reviewer identification and invitation, review consolidation, editorial decision, and revision management.	Approximately 3-6 hours per month
Editorial Board Member	Providing subject-area expertise to guide journal scope and quality; reviewing manuscripts when invited; advising on special issues; advocating for the journal in the scholarly community.	Approximately 1-3 hours per month
Guest Editor	Leading a Special Issue - developing the call for papers, managing submissions, coordinating reviewers, and delivering a complete issue to the EIC for final approval.	Variable - approximately 4-8 hours per month during the issue cycle

2. Benefits of Joining the Editorial Board

Serving as an InformedLens Journals editor is a professional investment - in your own scholarly development and in the broader research community. Here is what you gain.

Early Access to Cutting-Edge Research

As a handling editor, you read and engage with emerging scholarship before it is published - keeping you at the frontier of your field ahead of the broader research community.

Editorial Experience for Your CV

Editorial board membership and handling roles are recognised by promotion and tenure committees as evidence of scholarly leadership and service to the academic community.

Recognition and Visibility

All editorial board members are listed on the journal website with their affiliations and areas of expertise, increasing your visibility to global scholars in your field.

Annual Editorial Certificate

InformedLens Journals issues annual certificates of editorial service to all active board members and handling editors, suitable for academic portfolios and grant reporting.

International Scholarly Network

Working with authors and reviewers from across disciplines and regions broadens your professional network in ways that conference attendance alone cannot match.

Deepen Your Methodological Expertise

Evaluating manuscripts across a range of methods - qualitative, quantitative, mixed, conceptual - sharpens your own critical reading and research design skills.

Shape the Field

Editorial decisions influence what research gets disseminated, what conversations happen, and what gaps get filled - a direct contribution to the direction of your discipline.

Invitations to Contribute

Board members are given priority consideration for Guest Editor roles on Special Issues, invited editorials, and co-authorship of journal-level commentary pieces.

Interested in joining the Editorial Board? Send your CV and a brief statement of interest to the Editor-in-Chief.

Apply by Email Log In to Dashboard

3. Who We Are Looking For

InformedLens Journals welcomes editors from all disciplines within its scope. We value diversity - of geography, institution type, methodology, and career stage. You do not need to be a full professor to contribute meaningfully as an editor.

General Requirements

Hold a doctoral degree (PhD or equivalent) in a relevant discipline
Have a track record of peer-reviewed publications in your field
Demonstrate expertise in at least one of the journal's core thematic areas
Be committed to upholding COPE ethical standards in editorial practice
Be able to meet expected turnaround times consistently

For Section / Associate Editors - Additionally

Prior peer review experience (having reviewed for at least one academic journal)
Familiarity with manuscript management systems (OJS experience is an advantage but not required)
Ability to identify qualified reviewers and manage reviewer relations professionally

For Guest Editors - Additionally

A clearly defined Special Issue concept with a compelling call for papers
An existing network of potential contributors and reviewers in the thematic area
Prior experience as a reviewer or editorial board member (preferred)

Early-career academics: InformedLens Journals actively welcomes early-career researchers as Editorial Board Members. If you have completed your doctorate and have peer review experience, we encourage you to apply. Serving on an editorial board at this stage of your career builds skills and visibility that matter at every subsequent stage.

4. Editorial Roles in Detail

4.1 Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the overall scholarly integrity, quality, and strategic direction of the journal. The EIC:

Sets and maintains editorial standards and policies in line with COPE guidelines
Makes final acceptance and rejection decisions on all manuscripts
Appoints, guides, and supports Section Editors and Editorial Board Members
Approves Special Issue proposals and oversees Guest Editor performance
Monitors journal metrics - submission volumes, turnaround times, acceptance rates, and citation growth
Represents the journal in indexing applications, partnership discussions, and public scholarly communications
Handles author appeals and escalated ethical complaints

4.2 Section Editor / Associate Editor

Section Editors are the operational backbone of the review process. When a manuscript is assigned to you, you are responsible for managing it from desk review through to final decision.

Desk Screening

Assess whether the manuscript falls within the journal scope
Confirm that Turnitin checks (similarity 20% or below, AI content 15% or below) have been passed
Check that the manuscript is fully anonymised
Evaluate whether the manuscript meets a minimum quality threshold to warrant external review
Issue desk rejection (with reasons) or advance to peer review within 5-7 business days

Reviewer Management

Identify and invite at least two qualified, independent reviewers within 7 days of desk acceptance
Check for and manage conflicts of interest for all invited reviewers
Monitor reviewer progress and send timely reminders as deadlines approach
Replace reviewers who decline or become unresponsive without undue delay

Decision-Making

Read and weigh all reviewer reports carefully and independently
Issue one of four decisions: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject
Communicate the decision to the author with clear, consolidated feedback
Where reviewer recommendations conflict, seek a third review or make a reasoned editorial decision
Assess revised manuscripts and determine whether revisions adequately address reviewer concerns
Forward manuscripts for EIC final approval at the appropriate stage

Ethics and Integrity

Flag any suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission, or authorship concerns to the EIC immediately
Maintain strict confidentiality of all manuscripts and reviewer identities throughout the process
Recuse yourself from any manuscript where a conflict of interest exists

4.3 Editorial Board Member

Editorial Board Members are scholarly ambassadors for InformedLens Journals. Your role is advisory and contributory rather than operational. As a board member you:

Provide expert review of manuscripts in your area when invited by Section Editors
Advise on scope, focus, and strategic direction when consulted by the EIC
Suggest topics and potential contributors for Special Issues
Promote the journal among colleagues, students, and professional networks
Uphold and model COPE ethical standards in all scholarly interactions

4.4 Guest Editor (Special Issues)

Guest Editors lead the development of a Special Issue from concept to completion. The Guest Editor role involves:

Developing a compelling Special Issue theme and call for papers in collaboration with the EIC
Promoting the call for papers to potential contributors
Conducting initial screening of submissions for scope and quality fit
Coordinating the peer review process for all Special Issue manuscripts
Writing an introductory editorial for the Special Issue
Delivering a complete, publication-ready issue to the EIC within the agreed timeline

Guest Editor independence: Guest Editors must not handle manuscripts from their own institution, close collaborators, or their own research group. All submissions in which a conflict of interest exists must be transferred to a Section Editor or the EIC for handling.

5. The Editorial Workflow

All manuscripts follow the same structured workflow from submission to publication. Section Editors are responsible for Stages 1-6; the EIC handles Stage 7.

Stage	Action	Responsible	Target Timeframe
1. Submission	Manuscript received via OJS. System sends auto-confirmation to author.	System / EIC	Automatic
2. Assignment	EIC assigns manuscript to appropriate Section Editor based on topic and expertise.	EIC	Within 2 business days
3. Desk Screening	Section Editor checks scope, anonymisation, Turnitin scores, and minimum quality. Issues desk decision.	Section Editor	Within 5-7 business days of assignment
4. Reviewer Invitation	Section Editor identifies and invites minimum two reviewers. Tracks acceptances within 5 days.	Section Editor	Within 7 days of desk acceptance
5. Peer Review	Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and submit structured reports.	Reviewers	3 weeks from reviewer acceptance
6. Editorial Decision	Section Editor reads all reports, makes a recommendation, and communicates the decision to the author with consolidated feedback.	Section Editor	Within 7 days of all reviews received
7. Revision Cycle	Author revises and resubmits with a response letter. Section Editor assesses revision - re-reviewing if necessary.	Section Editor / Reviewers	Per agreed revision deadline
8. Final Approval	Section Editor forwards accepted manuscript to EIC for final approval and production.	EIC	Within 5 business days
9. Production	Manuscript enters copyediting, layout, and proof review before publication.	Editorial Office	2-4 weeks

Target total turnaround: InformedLens Journals aims to deliver an initial decision to authors within 4-6 weeks of submission. Section Editors are expected to actively manage their assigned manuscripts to keep this target achievable.

6. Making Editorial Decisions

Editorial decision-making is the most consequential part of your role. It requires independent scholarly judgement - not simply averaging reviewer opinions. Here is how to approach each outcome.

Decision	When and How to Use It
Accept	Reserve for manuscripts that are genuinely publication-ready. A first submission Accept is rare - use it when reviewer reports are uniformly positive, concerns are trivial, and the contribution is clearly established.
Minor Revision	Use when the manuscript is fundamentally sound and issues are small and clearly defined. List required changes specifically. A re-review is typically not necessary - you can assess the revision yourself.
Major Revision	Use when the manuscript has genuine merit but requires substantial work - additional analysis, significant rewriting, stronger theoretical framework, or addressing core methodological concerns. The revised manuscript should return to the original reviewers.
Reject	Use when the manuscript has fundamental flaws that cannot be remedied through revision. A rejection letter must include specific, honest reasons. Vague or dismissive rejection letters are not acceptable.

Key principle: Your decision letter should give authors a clear, actionable picture of what the problem is - whether you are asking for revision or explaining a rejection. Authors deserve to understand why, not just receive an outcome.

When Reviewer Reports Conflict

Conflicting reviewer recommendations are normal. Do not simply split the difference. Instead: read both reports carefully and assess the quality of the arguments in each; consider whether the concerns are about fundamental issues or matters of preference; invite a third reviewer if the disagreement is substantive; and make a reasoned decision explaining your reasoning briefly in the decision letter.

Handling Borderline Manuscripts

When a manuscript sits genuinely between Major Revision and Reject, ask: Is there a clear path to a publishable paper here, and is the author likely to take it? If yes, a Major Revision with very specific, structured requirements is appropriate. If the core contribution is absent or the research design is unfixable, reject - it is kinder in the long run than inviting multiple rounds of revision that will ultimately fail.

7. Editorial Ethics and Standards

InformedLens Journals editorial practice follows the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. All editors are expected to uphold these standards without exception.

7.1 Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review are strictly confidential. Editors must not discuss, share, or disclose any manuscript content, authorship, or review details outside the editorial process. This obligation continues after a decision is made.

7.2 Conflict of Interest

Editors must recuse themselves from any manuscript in which a conflict of interest exists. A conflict of interest includes: co-authorship, collaboration, or close personal relationship with any listed author; a supervisory or institutional relationship with any author; a financial interest in the outcome of the research; a prior strong public position on the specific claims of the manuscript; or working at the same institution as any of the authors. When a conflict exists, notify the EIC immediately and transfer the manuscript.

7.3 Impartiality

Manuscripts must be evaluated solely on scholarly merit. Editorial decisions must not be influenced by the geographic origin, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, language proficiency, or career stage of the authors. InformedLens Journals is committed to equitable editorial practice across all scholarly communities.

7.4 Responding to Ethical Concerns

If at any stage you identify or suspect an ethical violation - plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission, undisclosed conflicts of interest - you must notify the EIC immediately with the specific concern and any evidence; not make accusations directly to the author before the EIC has been informed; and follow the EIC's guidance on next steps, which may include requesting raw data, contacting the author's institution, or escalating to COPE.

7.5 Use of AI in Editorial Work

Editors may use AI tools for administrative tasks such as drafting reminder emails or summarising reviewer reports for their own reference. However:

Editorial decisions must reflect the editor's own independent scholarly judgement - AI tools must not be used to make or substantially draft acceptance or rejection decisions
Manuscripts submitted for review must be kept confidential and must not be uploaded to AI tools or third-party platforms
Any AI-assisted communication sent to authors must be reviewed and approved by the editor before sending

7.6 Appeals

Authors who believe their manuscript has been rejected in error may submit a formal appeal to the EIC within 30 days of the decision. As a Section Editor, if you receive a direct appeal from an author, forward it to the EIC without engaging further. Do not re-open a review process unilaterally.

8. Editorial Standards and Performance

InformedLens Journals monitors the editorial process to ensure authors receive timely, fair, and high-quality handling. Section Editors are expected to meet the following benchmarks consistently.

Action	Expected Timeframe
Desk screening decision	Within 5-7 business days of assignment
Reviewers identified and invited	Within 7 days of desk acceptance
Editorial decision after all reviews received	Within 7 days
Revision assessment (minor revisions)	Within 7 days of resubmission
Revision re-review coordination (major revisions)	Within 14 days of resubmission
Response to author queries	Within 3 business days

If you are unable to meet a deadline - due to illness, travel, or workload - notify the EIC as early as possible so manuscripts can be reassigned without delay to authors.

Manuscript load: Section Editors are typically assigned 2-4 manuscripts per quarter, depending on submission volumes and their declared area of expertise. If your load becomes unmanageable, please inform the EIC promptly rather than allowing manuscripts to stall.

9. How to Join the Editorial Board

InformedLens Journals welcomes applications to the editorial board on a rolling basis. There is no fixed annual recruitment window - we consider expressions of interest year-round and match incoming board members to areas of current need.

1Register on the journal platform - Create an account at informedlens.com and select Reviewer as your role. You can update to an editorial role after your application is reviewed.

2Prepare a brief expression of interest - In 300-500 words, tell us: (a) your academic background and current institutional affiliation; (b) your primary research and review expertise; (c) the editorial role you are interested in; and (d) why you want to contribute to this journal specifically.

3Attach your CV or academic profile - A current CV or link to your institutional profile or Google Scholar page helps us verify your publication record and expertise areas.

4Submit to the editorial office - Send your expression of interest and CV to [email protected]. Use the subject line: Editorial Board Application - [Your Name] - [Role Sought].

5Review and onboarding - The EIC reviews all applications and responds within 14 days. Successful applicants are onboarded to the OJS system, added to the editorial board listing on the journal website, and provided with a brief editorial orientation guide.

Special Issue proposals: If you have a specific Special Issue concept rather than a general editorial role application, please describe your proposed theme, scope, and timeline in your expression of interest. Special Issue proposals are reviewed by the EIC and, where approved, result in a Guest Editor appointment for that issue.

10. Editorial Recognition

InformedLens Journals recognises the time and expertise that editors invest in the journal. Active editors receive the following:

Listed on the journal website - Your name, title, institution, country, and areas of expertise appear on the journal's editorial board page, visible to global authors and readers
Annual editorial certificate - A formal certificate of editorial service issued each calendar year, documenting your role and the number of manuscripts handled - suitable for promotion files and grant applications
Invited contributions - Active board members are invited to contribute editorials, commentary pieces, and perspectives articles to the journal, subject to editorial review
Priority consideration for Special Issues - Board members are consulted first when new Special Issue opportunities arise
Publons / Web of Science recognition - Editorial contributions can be logged to your Publons profile for academic record purposes
Access to editorial analytics - Section Editors and board members receive periodic reports on journal performance metrics - submission volumes, turnaround times, acceptance rates, and readership data

11. Section Editor - Manuscript Handling Checklist

Use this checklist each time a manuscript is assigned to you to ensure consistent, complete handling.

Desk Screening

☐ Manuscript falls within the journal scope and thematic focus
☐ Turnitin similarity score confirmed at 20% or below
☐ Turnitin AI-generated content score confirmed at 15% or below
☐ Main manuscript file is fully anonymised - no author names, affiliations, or identifying references
☐ Manuscript meets minimum quality threshold for external review
☐ Desk decision communicated to author within 5-7 business days

Reviewer Management

☐ At least two qualified, independent reviewers identified and invited within 7 days
☐ Conflict of interest checked for all invited reviewers
☐ Reviewer reminder sent if no response within 5 days of invitation
☐ Replacement reviewer arranged promptly if original declines or becomes unresponsive

Decision and Communication

☐ All reviewer reports read carefully and weighed independently
☐ Decision made within 7 days of all reviews received
☐ Decision letter provides clear, specific, and constructive feedback to the author
☐ Conflicting reviews resolved - third reviewer invited or reasoned editorial decision made
☐ Accepted manuscript forwarded to EIC for final approval

Ethics and Integrity