JSOMER’s editorial governance is based on editorial independence, scholarly merit, methodological rigor, research and publication integrity, impartial decision-making, transparency, accountability, confidentiality, appropriate conflict management, disciplinary competence, international diversity, and timely editorial service.

Editors must respect academic freedom. A manuscript must not be disadvantaged because its findings, theory, methodology, or interpretation differs from an editor’s preferences. Academic freedom does not exempt a manuscript from standards of evidence, methodology, ethics, respectful communication, or applicable law.

Editorial appointments confer no ownership or financial rights. No editor may use an editorial role to obtain preferential treatment, advance personal or institutional interests, or interfere with independent peer review.

Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief provides academic and editorial leadership, maintains scholarly standards, oversees manuscript assessment and peer review, appoints qualified editors and reviewers, manages conflicts and integrity concerns, authorizes final decisions, oversees post-publication actions, reviews editorial performance, and maintains accurate journal policies and guidance.

The Editor-in-Chief has final editorial authority unless a conflict of interest requires transfer of full responsibility to an independent editor.

Associate Editors

Associate Editors manage manuscripts within their expertise, assess scope fit, select independent reviewers, oversee review and revision, evaluate reports and responses, identify methodological or ethical concerns, and make evidence-based recommendations. Final-decision authority must be formally delegated.

Editorial Board Members

Editorial Board members provide scholarly and strategic advice, recommend reviewers, review manuscripts when invited, support international and interdisciplinary scholarship, assess special-issue proposals, and contribute to editorial standards. Membership alone does not confer manuscript access or decision-making authority.

Guest Editors

Guest Editors may manage an approved special issue or defined project under the oversight of the Editor-in-Chief. They are subject to the same standards of independence, confidentiality, conflict management, peer review, and research integrity as permanent editors and must not handle their own manuscripts or conflicted submissions.

The editorial structure should collectively reflect JSOMER’s interdisciplinary scope, submission profile, emerging research areas, international readership and authorship, geographic and institutional diversity, and current workload. Equal representation from every field is not required at all times.

When the permanent team lacks adequate expertise, the Editor-in-Chief may appoint an independent handling editor or seek specialist advice. Diversity must not result in symbolic or inactive appointments; every appointment requires genuine scholarly qualifications, an editorial need, and meaningful participation.

Editors and Editorial Board members are selected according to the journal’s academic and operational needs. Selection considers:

• recognized expertise relevant to the journal’s aims and scope;
• an active and verifiable scholarly record;
• the quality, relevance, integrity, and continuity of research;
• editorial, peer-review, research-integrity, or academic leadership experience;
• commitment to confidentiality, impartiality, transparency, and publication ethics;
• ability to exercise independent academic judgment;
• contribution to disciplinary, methodological, geographic, and institutional diversity; and
• willingness and availability to participate actively.

Prior formal editorial experience is desirable but not essential when a candidate has suitable expertise and understands responsible peer review and publication ethics.

Before appointment, the journal verifies, as appropriate:

• name, position, institutional affiliation, and country or territory;
• areas of expertise and a reliable professional profile;
• ORCID iD, where available, and scholarly publication record;
• willingness to serve; and
• absence of conflicts preventing appropriate participation.

An individual must agree before being listed on the Editorial Team page. The publisher may provide administrative support but must not require an appointment or removal for commercial, political, institutional, personal, or reputational reasons.

Editors and Editorial Board members normally serve a three-year term. Renewal is not automatic and may consider:

• continued relevance of expertise;
• contribution to editorial activities;
• responsiveness to communications;
• quality and timeliness of assignments;
• compliance with ethical and editorial requirements;
• continued independent judgment; and
• the journal’s current disciplinary and organizational needs.

The conclusion of a term does not imply misconduct or dissatisfaction. Project-specific appointments, including Guest Editors, may be shorter.

All editors and Editorial Board members must:

• become familiar with the journal’s aims, scope, policies, and procedures;
• act honestly, impartially, respectfully, and professionally;
• protect manuscript, reviewer, author, and editorial confidentiality;
• disclose conflicts promptly and decline unsuitable assignments;
• base evaluations on scholarly evidence and editorial criteria;
• respect intellectual independence and avoid discrimination or improper influence;
• report suspected ethical or integrity concerns;
• maintain accurate affiliation and contact information;
• complete assignments promptly or report delays; and
• preserve editorial records and follow recognized publishing standards.

Editors must not:

• guarantee acceptance or promise favorable decisions;
• manipulate peer review;
• request citations for improper purposes;
• use confidential information for personal or institutional benefit; or
• influence journal metrics through inappropriate editorial practices.

Editorial decisions are based on:

• relevance to the journal’s aims and scope;
• originality and significance;
• methodological appropriateness and transparency;
• quality and clarity of reporting;
• ethical compliance;
• alignment between evidence and conclusions;
• engagement with relevant literature;
• independent peer-review reports; and
• authors’ responses and revisions.

Reviewer recommendations inform but do not automatically determine decisions. Editors assess the quality, reasoning, consistency, and relevance of reports and may depart from a recommendation when a documented scholarly, methodological, ethical, or editorial reason exists. Final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized independent editor.

Editorial decisions are independent of ownership, financing, technical administration, indexing objectives, and promotional activities. The publisher may support infrastructure, administration, website maintenance, metadata, accessibility, preservation, policy implementation, and communication with indexing services, but must not intervene in the scholarly assessment of individual manuscripts.

Decisions must not be influenced by:

• an author’s ability or inability to pay;
• nationality, institution, location, status, or personal characteristics;
• personal, professional, or institutional relationships;
• political or ideological agreement;
• commercial interests or potential media attention;
• the expected effect on citation metrics; or
• pressure from authors, reviewers, institutions, sponsors, the publisher, or other parties.

Editors must disclose any relationship or interest that could reasonably be perceived as affecting independent judgment. Relevant conflicts may include:

• authorship, co-authorship, or involvement in preparing the manuscript;
• recent or ongoing collaboration with an author;
• a close personal or professional relationship;
• same-institution employment when impartiality may be affected;
• direct academic competition;
• supervisory or mentoring relationships;
• financial interests;
• a related legal, institutional, or ethical dispute; or
• any circumstance that may undermine, or appear to undermine, independent judgment.

Sharing a broad discipline, country, professional association, or occasional conference contact is not automatically a conflict, but circumstances that could reasonably raise concern must be disclosed. A conflicted editor must not access, handle, or decide on the manuscript; responsibility must transfer to an independent editor.

Editors and Editorial Board members may submit manuscripts, but receive no preferential treatment or exemption from peer-review and ethical requirements. When an editor is an author or co-author, the individual must:

• have no role in initial assessment;
• not select or recommend reviewers;
• not access confidential discussions or reviewer information outside the author interface;
• not participate in the decision;
• have the manuscript assigned to an independent editor; and
• receive a published disclosure that the author had no role in review or decision-making.

When the Editor-in-Chief or publisher is an author or co-author, an independent editor assumes full responsibility for reviewer selection, handling, and the final decision.

Submitted manuscripts and related editorial information are confidential, including:

• manuscript content before publication;
• author identities in anonymized review;
• reviewer identities and reports;
• editorial comments and internal correspondence;
• ethical allegations and investigation materials; and
• unpublished data, methods, or ideas.

Information may be shared only with individuals who have a legitimate role in the relevant evaluation or investigation. Editors must not upload confidential materials to external artificial-intelligence systems or third-party services unless expressly authorized by journal policy and protected by adequate confidentiality, data-protection, and intellectual-property safeguards.

Editorial appointments are reviewed periodically. Review may consider:

• participation in editorial activities;
• quality and timeliness of handling or reviews;
• responsiveness to communications;
• compliance with confidentiality and conflict requirements;
• contribution to journal development;
• professional conduct;
• accuracy of affiliation information; and
• continuing relevance of expertise.

The purpose is to maintain an active, qualified, and accountable editorial structure. JSOMER does not knowingly present inactive individuals as current participants. Conduct concerns are documented and assessed fairly, and the individual should normally have an opportunity to respond.

A member may resign at any time by notifying the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Office in writing. An appointment may conclude when the individual:

• completes the agreed term and is not reappointed;
• requests to step down or can no longer fulfill the role;
• repeatedly fails to respond or complete accepted assignments;
• provides materially inaccurate professional information;
• fails to disclose a conflict;
• breaches confidentiality;
• attempts to manipulate review or decisions;
• uses the position for improper advantage;
• engages in conduct inconsistent with journal standards;
• is associated with substantiated research or publication misconduct; or
• otherwise places the journal’s integrity at material risk.

Removal decisions are documented and communicated in writing. Allegations concerning the Editor-in-Chief are reviewed by an independent senior scholar or panel. Former members are removed from the current Editorial Team page; a historical record may be retained.

Editors should promptly report changes in:

• institutional affiliation;
• academic title or position;
• country or territory;
• ORCID or professional profile information;
• contact information;
• relevant employment or financial interests; or
• ability to continue serving.

An institutional change does not automatically end an appointment. Listing on the Editorial Team page indicates agreement to serve. JSOMER does not knowingly list individuals who have not agreed, have resigned, completed service, cannot be contacted, or no longer fulfill the role.

Editorial Board membership and peer review are related but distinct forms of service. Board members may review when their expertise is appropriate, but JSOMER does not rely exclusively on Board members. External independent reviewers support appropriate expertise, impartiality, and diversity. Board members serving as reviewers have the same confidentiality, conflict-disclosure, impartiality, and reporting duties as all reviewers.

Authors, reviewers, readers, editors, and other stakeholders may submit concerns to the Editorial Office. A complaint should:

• identify the manuscript, decision, policy, or conduct concerned;
• explain the basis of the concern;
• include relevant documentation where available; and
• be submitted respectfully and on an evidence-based basis.

Submitting a complaint will not result in retaliation. Complaints about a handling editor are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent editor; those about the Editor-in-Chief go to an independent senior scholar or panel. Disagreement with a decision alone does not demonstrate misconduct. Appeals are handled under the journal’s complaints and appeals procedures.

This policy is reviewed periodically to ensure consistency with:

• the journal’s actual editorial structure and practices;
• its aims and scope;
• developments in research and publication ethics;
• recognized scholarly publishing standards; and
• relevant indexing, abstracting, and directory requirements.

Material governance changes will be reflected in this policy and communicated to serving editors where appropriate.