Publishing an article in the journal in which one is member of the editorial board ?

[CharlieNovember]

Actually, I have to admit that I'm quite astonished to see some paleontologists who (very) often publish their papers in scientific journals in which they are either associate editors or editor-in-chief etc... Aren't there any conflicts of interest in doing this ? Thank you in advance for any clarifications you may provide !

[thomasw100]

Paleontology is a rather small scientific community (compared to subjects like physics or chemistry) and therefore such a situation is sometimes unavoidable.

However, the rules of scientific integrity would require that in case an author of a paper would be a member of the editorial board of the journal to which that paper is submitted for potential publication, this person would not participate in the peer-review and decision process. The editorial responsibility would in this case be given to another member of the editorial board.

But of course the members of an editorial board often know each other quite well and certainly a manuscript with the name of a member of the board on it would perhaps come with a subconscious positive bias. The other members of the board would not like to upset that person and therefore such a paper has statistically somewhat better chances to get published.

[DinoToyForum]

It's fine. Independent peer-reviewers assess the submitted papers and those reviews guide the decision, and can't just be ignored. Authors are not involved in decisions related to their own papers, even in journals they are closely connected to. At least they shouldn't be, and if they are, that's wrong.

As a reviewer, I nearly always know whose paper I'm reviewing anyway, even if it's meant to be anonymous, because the community is so small we all know what each other is working on. And editors obviously know whose papers they're handling - sometimes it will be a friend, whether on an editorial board together or not. Unconscious biases are probably inevitable, even when we try to be as objective as possible. The peer-review process isn't perfect. But it's the best we've got.

To help make the point how small the paleo-community is, with reference to the Rivera/Longrich paper that may have sparked this discussion, Héctor Rivera-Silva is actually a close friend of mine. We did the same palaeontology course in the same year at the same university, and spent much time together. I have great respect for him, so I do find it jarring when I see strangers making jabs at him. I don't know Longrich personally though.

[CharlieNovember]

Many thanks guys for those clarifications 

[CharlieNovember]

It's fine. Independent peer-reviewers assess the submitted papers and those reviews guide the decision, and can't just be ignored. Authors are not involved in decisions related to their own papers, even in journals they are closely connected to. At least they shouldn't be, and if they are, that's wrong.

As a reviewer, I nearly always know whose paper I'm reviewing anyway, even if it's meant to be anonymous, because the community is so small we all know what each other is working on. And editors obviously know whose papers they're handling - sometimes it will be a friend, whether on an editorial board together or not. Unconscious biases are probably inevitable, even when we try to be as objective as possible. The peer-review process isn't perfect. But it's the best we've got.

To help make the point how small the paleo-community is, with reference to the Rivera/Longrich paper that may have sparked this discussion, Héctor Rivera-Silva is actually a close friend of mine. We did the same palaeontology course in the same year at the same university, and spent much time together. I have great respect for him, so I do find it jarring when I see strangers making jabs at him. I don't know Longrich personally though.

After checking indeed, as for what is being said on Rivera-Sylva, it turns out to be fake news as the looting took place in 1999, so long before he became a paleontologist !
Moreover, he doesn't seem to have an editorial role in "Cretaceous Research" nor "Fossil Studies" journals
Regarding Longrich, all the allegations of harassment/bullying (and even worse) are corroborated by the numerous links we can find on the topic on the web
And without mentioning that he is an associate editor/editorial board editor within both aforesaid scientific journals...

[bmathison1972]

It's fine. Independent peer-reviewers assess the submitted papers and those reviews guide the decision, and can't just be ignored. Authors are not involved in decisions related to their own papers, even in journals they are closely connected to. At least they shouldn't be, and if they are, that's wrong.

As a reviewer, I nearly always know whose paper I'm reviewing anyway, even if it's meant to be anonymous, because the community is so small we all know what each other is working on. And editors obviously know whose papers they're handling - sometimes it will be a friend, whether on an editorial board together or not. Unconscious biases are probably inevitable, even when we try to be as objective as possible. The peer-review process isn't perfect. But it's the best we've got.

To help make the point how small the paleo-community is, with reference to the Rivera/Longrich paper that may have sparked this discussion, Héctor Rivera-Silva is actually a close friend of mine. We did the same palaeontology course in the same year at the same university, and spent much time together. I have great respect for him, so I do find it jarring when I see strangers making jabs at him. I don't know Longrich personally though.

I agree 100%

There is nothing wrong with publishing in journals for which you are on the editorial boards. I am on the editorial board for the Journal of Clinical Microbiology and publish there periodically, because there are other editors and peer reviewers to review my content, and those reviewers are kept confidential from me. And I will soon be joining the editorial board for ASM Case Reports and will likely publish there eventually.

There is nothing at all surprising, shocking, or unethical in such a practice (regardless of what becomes of the example above).