Editors are often tasked with writing introductions to an issue, especially if the issue is on a specific theme or topic. Many editors achieve that status by being experts in their discipline and also have a role to play as commentators within their discipline. To me, neither of these are a form of fraud or malpractice. However, I would immediately be suspect of a manuscript purporting to be peer-reviewed that was authored by the editor of the journal.

Editors are often tasked with writing introductions to an issue, especially if the issue is on a specific theme or topic. Many editors achieve that status by being experts in their discipline and also have a role to play as commentators within their discipline. To me, neither of these are a form of fraud or malpractice. However, I would immediately be suspect of a manuscript purporting to be peer-reviewed that was authored by the editor of the journal.

Thanks, very helpful

dave

Peer review is the usual determinant. It is rare for the editor to publish in a journal while she is editor. The caveat here is if it is a special issue that the

editor introduces

No they should not. The purpose of journals is to disseminate knowldge, not to act as a personal platform for the views of the editor.

Editorial overviews may be acceptable but even here this would be better done by different individuals.

This doesn't seem to happen in History journals from my experience but may do in others-such as Philosophy-where I have come across such behaviour. But on occasion it is acceptable, if the contribution genuinely adds to a theme,

I agree with Dr. Peter Kindle.

Sharon and Barry, thanks...they just should not.

I understand that it would be not acceptable. I don't recommend.

I am associated with one journal. As per journal policy, every issue should contain an editorial on recent scientific topic.

The chief editor, associate editor and editorial board members generally write such editorial article in the journal.

What is wrong in it?

After all, only quality matters.

Thanks.

I guess we are talking about non-editorials and peer reviewed papers. By the way are these editorials peer reviewed?

Dave

If the Editor uses publish the presentation of the current edition, I think this is not a problem. If he uses frequently publish his articles, this is not ethical.

I follow Dr. Peter Kindle answer

Good question. I agree with Dr. Barry Turner

Regards

They can only summarize what is happening in the field in the form of editorials

I agree with Dr.Barry, but quality should be maintained

Interesting question

If the editors write full text articles frequently in the journals which they edit,it is disagreeable.

David,

Interesting question. As you may have gathered from the comments to date, the key lies in what is meant by "the most prolific authors". Are we talking about journal editors as authors of editorials (standard practice, which serves a useful function) or as authors of research articles (questionable practice)?

Hi Joanna

The answers to my questions have helped to clarify what i was thinking and it was very much the latter!

Thanks

Dave

It's not acceptable for editors to frequently write and publish their own articles for their own journals. This seems to be a particular problem of The Bone and Joint Journal UK.

Dear David,

This is a very interesting question, although I am a bit late with my contribution. My personal opinion is that they should not, apart from short editorial notes (they are not peer-reviewed articles).

Fortunately for the executive board members (editor-in-chief and co-editors) of the Portuguese Economic Journal, this potential conflict of interest has been solved with a simple prohibition in the by-laws of the journal: http://www.pej.pt/bylaws.html.

Let me quote "A Short Guide to Ethical Editing for New Editors" by COPE - Committee on Publication Ethics: "While you should not be denied the ability to publish in your own journal, you must take extra precautions not to exploit your position or to create an impression of impropriety." This is a bit too soft for my taste, but it aims right at the "frequently" in your question.

I would reply by another question: what if the editor is an outstanding scientist, e.g. a Nobel Prize? Whereas I understand that there is a possibility of unethical behavior, building administrative norms and barriers everywhere will end scientific discovery. As Chief Editor, my aim is to publish the best science, and thus scientific quality is my sole criterion. It is really not in the interest of a Chief Editor to publish bad science.

There should be certain rules for number of quality publications published in their own journals by the editorial members of any peer reviewed journals. There should be restrictions for prolific publications in their own journals. So It's not acceptable for editors to frequently write and publish their own articles for their own journals.

An editorial is clearly different than an article. However as I understand it a Journal's Editorial team are experts in the field and as such should submit articles to that Journal. In many Journals this is encouraged. However there should then be a rigorous independent peer review process of any submissions. Most systems, such as ScholarOne, block the editor from seeing the review process and identifying reviewers where the editor is the author. Frequency is a separate issue depending on the Journal policy which should be the same for editor and others.

Not wise to peer reviewed full research and review articles exceptional being editorial, summary on the thematic issues

It is unethical to published frequently in a journal where you have a post of editor or editorial team in any journal. However, editor or editorial team can be written Introduction, commentary and overview but not by the same individual by the different member of the editorial team.

Editor and editorial team can publish articles other journals with relevant to their file.

yes, if you want to maintain transparency than it is not advisable to publish frequently. You are holding a post in editorial board , at the same time someone publishing frequently in the same journal as an author , not looks fair and ethical.

The whole practise of publishing research in peer reviewed journals is based on the principle of trust of readers that the research they get to read has gone through through process of peer review. That peer review should be blind peer review (single or double) so that a favour is not given to the author. The editor has the responsibility of sending the research paper to reviewers. It is the responsibility of the editor to ensure that the reviewer and the author(s) do not get to know each other. If the editor is himself the author, the work being peer reviewed by unknown reviewers becomes questionable. The editor being an authority of a journal should refrain from publishing in his own journal so that the prestige of the journal is not affected. So yes, it would be considered unethical.