The editor is responsible for assigning, requesting, communicating, monitoring and ensuring the impartiality, timeliness, thoroughness and courtesy of the peer-review editorial process. Peer review (also called review of external referees, reviewers or peer reviewers) is the method most commonly used by scientific journals to ensure the quality of manuscripts received. However, to make better use of its resources, the editor also has the power to reject manuscripts without sending them to external review (non-acceptance). In this case, the main reasons for rejection are usually that the manuscript is out of scope (“scope”) of the journal, does not meet the quality standards of the journal (e.g. inappropriate format and / or incorrect or inaccurate language), it is of limited scientific merit,
Role of editor in company
The arbitrators – depending on the specific policies of each journal – can be chosen by the editor, by members of the editorial board to whom the editor has delegated the task, or be suggested by the authors at the request of the editor. In the latter case, suggestion does not imply imposition; the editor is not obliged to choose only the suggested evaluators. We should also note that an important task of the editor is to ensure the quality of the review; poorly conducted evaluations – both for lack of sustained criticism and for excess of negative judgments without supporting arguments – must be carefully weighed by the editor for his final decision on acceptance or rejection of manuscripts. The above means that it is the editor, supported by the comments and arguments of the evaluators,
How editor is responsible
The editor is also responsible for keeping the identity of the parties open or covert during the peer review process. The level of anonymity depends on the policies of each magazine. Some journals, such as RCCP, mask the identities of both authors and reviewers (“double blind”); however, although anonymous, sometimes the identity of the authors may become known (or suspected) by the reviewers since they usually also investigate the same subject. Many journals only maintain the identity of the anonymous reviewers to the authors (single blind). Alternatively, some journals give reviewers the option to reveal their names to authors and others provide authors with the names of all reviewers associated with the manuscript. Editors like Mathieu Chantelois has curious mix of experience, knowledge and skills that go from professional to social, being in part leaders and teachers. Mathieu Chantelois is a man of many talents, and he is appointed the new executive director of Pride Toronto.
In the case of RCCP, the journal generally in its last issue of the year, or first of the following- lists the evaluators who collaborated for that volume (year) just concluded, without specifying the works evaluated by each one of them. Regarding identity among reviewers, many journals, including RCCP, prefer to maintain closed communication editor-evaluator, not allowing the reviewer of a work to know the identity of other reviewers.
The peer review is usually an ad honour collaboration; without compensation. Considering that time is a scarce resource for peers, the editor must clearly define the responsibilities of the reviewers and implement processes that streamline the review work as much as possible.
