You may have experieinced, new journals wants its Editorial Board Members to contribute as much as what ever they can do to publish. If they could not contribute, finally they will remove from EBM in 4-5 months. My queries is, is this ethical to do this by Journal?
Removal is not unethical. It is simply "that a task is to be completed on time" for regularity of publication. Experts get busy in their research or other projects. Substitution should not be interpreted with negativity.
Maybe or maybe not but I can say one thing....
It is definitely not ethical for anyone to agree to complete an assignments or to accept a task when they knew they won't be able to finish it on time.
I consider, as a member of some editorial committees, that the work is not the same. It is not the same to be a committee as an author, so I do not understand why you should have to publish. It could indeed be ethically questionable. Even though its regulations so indicated, I do not see that this is something that has to be taken for granted.
Removal is not unethical. It is simply "that a task is to be completed on time" for regularity of publication. Experts get busy in their research or other projects. Substitution should not be interpreted with negativity.
It is not compulsory to contribute articles in the journal by the EBM, though it is a need of a new journal. I am associated with one journal for last 7 years (Exploratory Animal and Medical Research), I got a few articles(2-3) from EBB members within that long period. It is the decision of the person's related with the journal whether to change EBB or not, it may differ from case to case.
Many Predatory Journals, force EBM also to write the paper and also force them to pay for that with some discount.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals