For editors

Join the Editorial Team

Have you considered becoming an editor for a Combinatorial Press journal or wish to recommend a colleague for the Editorial Board? Contact the managing editor of the respective journal; we welcome your input. Editors form the nucleus of our journals, collaborating with international teams of experts in various research domains. These esteemed academics guide our journal development, ensuring the publication of top-tier research.

Roles and Responsibilities of an Academic Editor

Academic Editors evaluate manuscript scope and quality, supervise the peer review process, and provide recommendations based on reviewer feedback. In this role, you’ll uphold the journal’s commitment to publishing impactful research. Your responsibilities include:

Managing up to 10 manuscripts annually and facilitating peer review
Evaluating Special Issue proposals
Proposing new Special Issue topics
Offering input on the journal’s direction and performance
Advocating for the journal within your community to spotlight crucial new research

Benefits of Being an Academic Editor

Being a Combinatorial Press journal editor positions you at the forefront of evolving research trends in your field. It fosters interactions with peers, establishes collaborative networks, and provides valuable insights into scientific publishing dynamics, enriching both your academic profile and authorial experience. As an editor, you’ll enjoy:

Recognition on the journal website, showcasing your name and affiliation
Complimentary access to all subscription-based (non-open access) Combinatorial Press publications
An editor certificate acknowledging your role on the Editorial Board

Editorial Resources

For the benefit of our Academic Editors, authors, and prospective Editors, we provide accessible resources without requiring login credentials.

Roles and Responsibilities of Editors

Academic Editors at Combinatorial Press play a crucial role in evaluating the scope and quality of submitted manuscripts, offering recommendations based on peer reviewer feedback. Editorial Boards collectively ensure the journal’s commitment to publishing high-caliber research aligned with its objectives.

Guidance on Manuscript Handling

Deciding the fate of a manuscript is a significant responsibility of Academic Editors at Combinatorial Press. Whether you’re a new Editor, Guest Editor, or returning after a hiatus, our step-by-step guide aids in navigating the editorial process. Editors receive email invitations when assigned a new manuscript, with our team considering their field of expertise and current workload. While Editors should be comfortable with the manuscript’s topic, an in-depth understanding is not mandatory, as technical assessment falls under the purview of peer reviewers. If an Editor feels a manuscript diverges significantly from their expertise, they have the option to decline the assignment.

Maintaining Integrity

Although Editors undergo careful selection, if they identify a potential conflict of interest (e.g., shared institution with authors or involvement in a competitive project), it is imperative to decline handling the manuscript. Upholding the highest standards of integrity is paramount in ensuring the credibility of the editorial process.

Management of Conflicts of Interest

As a member of a journal’s Editorial Board, vigilance regarding potential conflicts of interest in manuscript handling is paramount.

Personal Assessment: Editors must first assess their own potential conflicts. Recent coauthorship with the manuscript’s author(s) or shared affiliation and employment history may compromise objectivity. While Combinatorial Press endeavors to avoid such assignments, Editors are expected to declare conflicts. If a conflict is perceived, Editors should decline handling the manuscript.
Expert Judgment: Editors, as subject experts, play a crucial role in evaluating conflicts declared by authors. They are well-positioned to identify any undeclared conflicts. This awareness should inform their recommendation on the manuscript.
Reviewer Assignment: When assigning reviewers, Editors should avoid selecting referees who work or have recently worked at the same institution as the author(s), recently coauthored a paper with them, or have an ongoing collaboration. Discretion is advised for publications authored by a consortium. If concerns arise about a potential reviewer, an alternative appointment is recommended. If an Editor suspects a reviewer’s recommendation serves personal interests, authors may be informed that addressing that point is optional.
Specialized Areas: Certain specialist fields may involve a higher likelihood of association and collaboration among researchers. Despite a connection, an Editor may be best suited for handling a manuscript. In such instances, communication with the managing editor is essential for transparency.

Preliminary Assessment

Combinatorial Press conducts crucial editorial scrutiny for all submissions before the assignment to Editors. Upon manuscript receipt, Editors must conduct an initial assessment to determine its potential suitability for publication. This involves evaluating whether the article aligns with the scientific scope of the journal and assessing its basic quality. For acceptance, research in a Combinatorial Press journal must meet the following criteria:

Scientific Validity: Adherence to established community research standards.
Technical Accuracy: Precision in methods and results presentation.
Representativeness: Significance as a specific advance, replication, or null/negative result worthy of publication.
Reproducibility: Maximum sharing of underlying data, code, and supporting materials.
Ethical Soundness: Adherence to best practices in animal and human studies, consent to publish, and transparent declaration of potential conflicts of interest, real or perceived.

Peer Reviewer Selection Protocol

Editors are tasked with inviting a minimum of two reviewers to evaluate the manuscript, with the option to select preferred reviewers. While Editors’ suggestions are encouraged, Combinatorial Press’s Editorial Office is available for additional reviewer recommendations. Several crucial considerations apply to the selection of peer reviewers:

Impartiality: Reviewers should not be affiliated with the same institution as the authors or engage in active collaborations. Any referees flagged for potential conflicts of interest will be reassigned.
Qualifications: Reviewers should possess substantial expertise in the relevant field, as gauged through their publication history. Reviewers may range from post-doctoral researchers to emeritus professors, and occasionally industry experts may be suitable.
Expertise Coverage: Manuscripts covering diverse aspects may require a team of reviewers to adequately assess them. Editors must ensure that, collectively, the selected reviewers possess the skills needed to evaluate various techniques employed.

Editors may tap into their academic network for potential reviewers, identifying suitable candidates through conferences, collaborations, or professional relationships. Exploring abstracting and indexing services for relevant keywords or referencing a manuscript’s bibliography can uncover researchers working on related topics. Although finding appropriate reviewers can be challenging due to time constraints, declined invitations may lead to valuable recommendations from experts, especially those within the invitee’s research group or institution. Upon request, reviewers may consult with colleagues from their research group, ensuring manuscript confidentiality. In such cases, reviewers are expected to specify the colleague’s name in the ‘comments to the editor’ section of their report.

Decision-Making in Editorial Evaluation

Upon thoroughly reviewing the manuscript, each reviewer is tasked with providing a comprehensive report along with one of the following recommendations:

Accept
Accept after Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject

Determining the manuscript’s fate based on reviewers’ recommendations involves nuanced considerations. Unanimous rejection suggestions warrant rejection, but a single reviewer identifying a critical technical flaw can justify rejection, even if others provide positive feedback. Published manuscripts must exhibit technical soundness, with concerns over experimental validity or employed logic leading to rejection. While perceived importance and potential impact should not be primary rejection factors, papers must present original research contributing to scientific understanding. Combinatorial Press journals prioritize significant work for specialists, rejecting replicative or highly derivative submissions unless a robust scientific case supports publication. If reviewers identify insurmountable problems, such as critical flaws in experiments or previously presented results, the Editor should reject the manuscript. If improvements could render the manuscript suitable for publication, Editors should invite authors to revise and resubmit. Editors may use ‘Accept after Minor Revision’ when confident in personally assessing suggested changes; otherwise, ‘Major Revision’ is appropriate if reviewers’ expertise is necessary for evaluation. If reviewers find no faults and deem the manuscript suitable for current publication, the Editor may opt for ‘Accept.’ Maintaining confidentiality is paramount. Editors must refrain from utilizing insights until after publication. Reviewers remain anonymous to authors unless they choose to reveal their identity by signing the review report. Editors should never disclose reviewer names to authors or the broader community.

Ethical Standards in Publication

The editorial screening team at Combinatorial Press rigorously examines manuscripts and scrutinizes authors’ publication records for potential issues like plagiarism and various forms of research misconduct. Should an Editor encounter any publication ethics concerns during the handling of a manuscript, encompassing plagiarism, authorship disputes, duplicate or redundant submissions, or data and figure manipulation, prompt communication with the managing editor of the respective journal is essential. Periodically, Editors may be consulted regarding ethical matters related to published articles. Combinatorial Press adheres to the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and we recommend a thorough review of their guidelines and additional resources for comprehensive understanding.

Editorial Evaluation Criteria

In order to ensure impartial and equitable consideration for all submitted manuscripts, our journals adhere to a transparent editorial threshold for assessment. We value all scientific contributions, whether they represent significant advancements or incremental progress. Our editorial policy dictates that editors and reviewers assess the scientific merit of a paper, focusing on its quality as a specific advance, replication, or null/negative result, without evaluating subjective elements such as interest or perceived impact. For publication in our journals, research must meet the following criteria:

Scientific Validity: Conforming to established community research standards.
Technical Accuracy: Precision in the application of methods and presentation of results.
Specific Advance: Signifying a notable progress, replication, or null/negative outcome worthy of dissemination.
Reproducibility: Endeavoring to share underlying data, code, and supporting materials when feasible.
Ethical Soundness: Adherence to best practices concerning animal and human studies, consent to publish, and transparent disclosure of potential conflicts of interests, both real and perceived.

Clarification on Novelty in Academic Publishing

The concept of novelty should be distinguished from quality and must not serve as the sole determinant for a manuscript’s suitability for publication. Building upon existing research remains valuable, offering substantial interest to both researchers and broader audiences. It is our commitment to disseminate technically accurate and scientifically robust research to our readership. When we emphasize that lack of novelty should not lead to rejection, we imply that manuscripts should not be dismissed solely because they delve into previously explored topics. Manuscripts contributing to the confirmation, consolidation, enrichment, or replication of established data can carry significant impact. We assert that any form of progress, even if incremental, holds value.

Out-of-Scope Manuscripts

Should a manuscript fall outside the designated scope of the journal it was submitted to, rejection before peer review is appropriate. However, if the manuscript demonstrates reasonable quality and scientific rigor, editors are encouraged to propose alternative journals or more pertinent subject areas. Authors receive a list of suitable transfer destinations, ensuring the publication of all well-founded research.

Interpreting iThenticate Similarity Reports at Combinatorial Press

As part of our collaboration with Crossref, Combinatorial Press employs iThenticate software to identify text overlap between submitted manuscripts and existing literature. Periodically, our Editorial Office may forward you a similarity report for assessment, aiming to evaluate potential inappropriate re-use of language. The report includes an overall percentage indicating the extent of text reuse. It’s essential to interpret this figure cautiously, as a high percentage does not inherently denote misconduct but serves as an indicator of possible plagiarism or redundancy. It’s crucial to scrutinize the report to identify the sources of overlap and the specific sections affected. Considerations during assessment:

Nature of Overlap: Evaluate whether the similarities are fragmentary or in blocks. Determine if complete sentences or paragraphs are replicated from previous works.
Location of Overlap: Duplication in background ideas or common methods may be viewed differently than duplication in the discussion or conclusions.
Data Duplication: Uncredited duplication of data is typically unacceptable.
Citation: Check if the source of text overlap was properly cited and discussed.
Authorship: Investigate whether the source was authored by the same individuals as the Combinatorial Press submission. Concerns might involve copyright or redundant publication rather than plagiarism, and some overlap is permissible, such as with the authors’ own preprints or theses, provided they are acknowledged.
Software Accuracy: Consider the possibility of software miscalculations, such as including text within quotation marks or flagging similarities in the references.

If you believe the similarity level warrants attention, authors can be asked to rewrite relevant sections and cite any missing references before peer review. If the manuscript is deemed excessively plagiarized, rejection may be appropriate. For inquiries about iThenticate reports or to discuss plagiarism concerns, please contact the Editorial Office. For further details, refer to: https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/ https://help.turnitin.com/ithenticate/ithenticate-user/the-similarity-report/the-similarity-report.htm

Approval Process for Special Issues

Special Issues, unique editions of a journal dedicated to a specific topic or contemporary theme, are proposed and overseen by Guest Editors external to the Editorial Board. However, Editorial Board members, including publishing Editors, are encouraged to submit Special Issue proposals. Combinatorial Press’s publishing Editors conduct thorough due diligence on all Special Issue proposals. This involves verifying essential information and assessing the potential for receiving an adequate number of submissions in response to the Call for Papers. The Editorial Board, consisting of subject matter experts, is ideally positioned to evaluate whether the proposed topic aligns well with the journal’s focus. Therefore, Editors are consulted for their insights and advice on the viability and suitability of a Special Issue proposal. This collaborative approach ensures that only high-quality and relevant Special Issues move forward for publication.

Evaluation of Special Issue Proposals

Combinatorial Press’s commitment to advancing scholarly discourse includes the publication of Special Issues—curated collections of articles focusing on a specific research area within the journal’s scope. These Special Issues are proposed and managed by a dedicated team of Guest Editors responsible for overseeing the peer review process and promoting the collection. Before initiating a Special Issue, we actively seek input from our esteemed Editorial Board Members. Their expertise is pivotal in assessing the proposal’s appropriateness concerning scope, timeliness, anticipated contribution to the journal and field, and the suitability of the proposed Guest Editor team. Based on the valuable insights from our Editorial Board, Combinatorial Press’s Content Development Team makes an informed decision on whether to proceed with the proposed Special Issue. The subsequent sections offer comprehensive guidance on the evaluation process for Special Issue proposals.

Scope Assessment for Special Issue Proposals

Evaluating the breadth and relevance of a proposed Special Issue is a crucial step in the assessment process. The proposal, typically presented as a Call for Papers, serves as a guide for potential contributors, outlining the theme and inviting manuscript submissions. The primary consideration during this evaluation is whether the proposed topic aligns with the defined scope of the journal to which it is submitted. The journal’s aims and scope can be accessed under the ‘information menu’ section on its website. The Special Issue’s scope should strike a balance—sufficiently broad to attract a reasonable number of submissions yet focused enough to ensure a cohesive collection of articles. It is essential to cover a specific aspect of the journal’s scope, avoiding an attempt to encompass the entire spectrum. Emphasis should be placed on highlighting the contemporary relevance of the subject and justifying the need for new research in that particular area. While providing adequate background information to entice submissions, the proposal should maintain conciseness, as brevity enhances its appeal to qualified researchers and encourages high-quality submissions. Throughout the text and topic descriptions, the scope of the proposal must be evident, avoiding overly broad statements that encompass the entire journal scope. The structure of the special issue proposal should adhere to the following guidelines:

The title should be concise (within 10 words) and descriptive, avoiding phrases like ‘recent advances in…’ or ‘new insights into…’ and refraining from posing it as a question.
A brief summary paragraph should outline the chosen topic and its position within the broader subject.
Another paragraph should address the main challenges faced by research in the chosen area.
The final paragraph should articulate the proposed aims and summarize the scope of the Special Issue, elucidating the types of studies it aims to attract.
The Call for Papers should conclude with 5-15 suggested topics, serving as ‘signposts’ for potential authors. These topics provide guidance while ensuring alignment with the Special Issue’s scope. Each topic should offer more detail than a couple of keywords, explicitly linked to the proposed Issue’s focus.

Evaluation of Editorial Team for Special Issues

Each Special Issue is spearheaded by a Lead Guest Editor supported by a team of 2-5 Guest Editors, as outlined in the proposal. The proposal provides the names and affiliations of all Editors involved in the proposed issue. Combinatorial Press meticulously screens Guest Editors to ensure compliance with the journal’s editorial standards. When independently evaluating the team, consider whether the Guest Editors possess the requisite expertise to handle incoming submissions. Assess their publication records and professional backgrounds, utilizing databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, or Google Scholar if necessary. To foster diversity and mitigate conflicts of interest, it is encouraged that Guest Editors hail from multiple institutions and locations. This approach broadens the potential audience and enriches the perspectives brought to the Special Issue.

Promotion of the Journal

Effective promotion is vital for the success of journals, relying on the active support of Editorial Boards. Editors are encouraged to share their contributions with colleagues, add the journals to their online profiles, and promote them during academic conferences.

Editorial Board Appointments

The size of the Editorial Board is influenced by various factors, including submission volume, manuscript processing times, and the time commitment of individual members. If circumstances necessitate an adjustment in board size, such as retirement or increased demand, Combinatorial Press will oversee the recruitment of new Editors.

Inviting Academic Editors

Invitations to join as an Academic Editor are extended to individuals with a proven track record of publishing well-received papers within the journal’s scope. Potential candidates undergo assessment by Combinatorial Press before receiving an invitation.

Special Issue Guest Editorship

• For those aspiring to organize a Special Issue, comprehensive resources are available to guide through the process. These include assembling a Guest Editor team, crafting a proposal, advertising the Call for Papers, managing submissions, and celebrating the published Issue.

Contact Us

The editorial office remains readily available to provide support. For inquiries regarding editorial responsibilities at Combinatorial Press, contact your Managing Editor.