Updating editorial policies - Featured

Updating Editorial Policies: A Step-by-Step Guide for Journal Editors

by

Table of Contents

Introduction

Editorial policies are the invisible scaffolding of scholarly publishing. They determine what gets published, how peer review operates, how conflicts are managed, and how journals respond to ethical breaches. In short, they are the backbone of trust in academic communication. Yet many editorial policies haven’t been revised in years. Some haven’t even been read in years.

As academic publishing faces intense pressure from open access mandates, AI-generated submissions, replication crises, and shifting norms around peer review, it’s no longer sufficient for journals to rely on boilerplate documents written a decade ago. Updating editorial policies is not just a bureaucratic task. It’s a strategic move directly affecting a journal’s reputation, discoverability, and impact.

This article walks editors and journal managers through the practical steps of revising editorial policies. It outlines the why, what, and how, grounded in current best practices, emerging trends, and a healthy dose of reality. If your journal hasn’t reviewed its policies since the pre-pandemic days, this guide will help you catch up and perhaps lead the way.

Why Editorial Policies Matter More Than Ever

Editorial policies were once primarily internal documents, useful for editors and reviewers, but not something the average author or reader would scrutinize. That’s no longer true. Today, policies are public, and stakeholders are paying attention.

Most indexed journals in Scopus and Web of Science publicly list detailed editorial policies on topics ranging from data availability to conflicts of interest. Policies that were once tucked away in PDFs are now central to journal evaluation, particularly for institutions that assess transparency, inclusivity, and compliance with open science mandates.

Moreover, funders like cOAlition S and NIH are tying policy compliance to publication eligibility. Journals without clear data-sharing policies, for example, are increasingly being excluded from compliant lists. Platforms like the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) also now require demonstrable evidence of editorial integrity, which hinges on robust and regularly updated policies.

Add to this the growing use of AI in manuscript generation and peer review, and you have an editorial environment that’s changing faster than many policies can keep up with. An outdated policy isn’t just embarrassing. It’s also risky. Editorial policies must now serve as adaptive blueprints that are flexible enough to incorporate innovation, yet firm enough to maintain quality and ethical standards.

Step 1: Assess What Needs Updating

Before you draft new language, start with a comprehensive audit. Gather all existing editorial policies, including submission guidelines, peer review statements, conflict of interest forms, data availability protocols, and ethical guidelines.

Ask yourself: Are these policies clear, current, and compliant with international norms? Are they visible on your journal’s website? Do they reflect actual practice, or are they aspirational artifacts from another era?

You can use tools like the COPE’s guidelines for editors. This tool helps you benchmark your journal’s current documentation against global standards.

A typical assessment reveals multiple gaps, including the absence of policies on data availability, unclear authorship criteria, outdated peer review models (such as requiring anonymity in an increasingly open-review world), and a lack of guidance on retractions, AI tools, and reviewer responsibilities.

And here’s the hard truth: policies that don’t evolve often contradict how journals actually operate. This disconnect can lead to confusion, editorial inconsistency, and reputational damage. A policy review, then, is not just about compliance. It’s also about coherence and clarity.

Step 2: Benchmark Against Leading Journals

No need to reinvent the wheel. The top journals in your field—and beyond—are excellent sources of policy inspiration. Leading titles from publishers like Elsevier, Springer Nature, PLOS, and Taylor & Francis often have publicly accessible editorial policy pages that you can study.

Look at how these journals structure their policies. What language do they use? How do they handle common ethical dilemmas? What stance do they take on preprints, AI tools, or co-reviewing?

Importantly, note how they present these policies. Are they buried in PDFs, or well-integrated into the user interface? The design of your policies page matters as much as the content.

For instance, PLOS ONE clearly categorizes its policies under Editorial and Publishing Policies, with separate tabs for data availability, authorship, competing interests, and reporting guidelines. This user-friendly structure not only helps authors but also reduces the burden on editorial staff to answer the same questions repeatedly.

Use benchmarking to identify both content gaps and user experience flaws in your own policy presentation. Then, set realistic goals: Are you trying to become COPE-compliant, meet Plan S requirements, or simply reduce confusion among authors and reviewers?

Benchmarking also provides an opportunity to identify a unique positioning. For instance, if no other journal in your field addresses AI authorship, you can be the first to take a bold, ethical stand. That alone can elevate your journal’s profile.

Step 3: Identify Stakeholders and Create a Policy Committee

Revising editorial policies isn’t a solo act. At minimum, you’ll want input from the editor-in-chief, managing editor, production staff, and a few editorial board members. Depending on the scope of changes, you may also involve external reviewers, librarians, or legal advisors.

Form a small editorial policy committee tasked with evaluating the audit results and proposing revisions. This team should also handle communications and approvals, especially if your journal is under the umbrella of a larger publisher or university press.

The benefits of a committee are twofold:

  1. Diverse perspectives help prevent blind spots
  2. Collective ownership increases buy-in during implementation. A managing editor alone may miss nuances that a peer review coordinator sees daily.

Schedule regular working sessions to review each policy section methodically. Break up the work so the task doesn’t feel overwhelming. If possible, use collaborative tools like Google Docs, Notion, or Overleaf for live editing and commentary.

Assign clear roles. One member can oversee benchmarking, another can handle compliance review, and another can manage copyediting. This improves efficiency and maintains accountability.

Step 4: Draft and Revise Policy Documents

Start with the policies that most urgently need updating, typically those related to authorship, peer review, AI tools, and data sharing. Prioritize clarity and consistency. Avoid legalese or jargon. Remember: policies should be enforceable, but also understandable.

Here are the key policy areas to address in 2025:

  • Authorship and Contributions: Define who qualifies as an author. Require contributor role taxonomies (like CRediT) to be submitted.
  • AI Use Disclosure: State clearly if generative AI is permitted, under what conditions, and what must be disclosed.
  • Data Availability: Require authors to state where data can be accessed, with a strong preference for FAIR repositories.
  • Conflicts of Interest: Include updated definitions and procedures for authors, reviewers, and editors.
  • Peer Review Models: Clarify whether the journal employs single-blind, double-blind, or open peer review, and what responsibilities reviewers are assigned.
  • Misconduct and Retractions: Describe how suspected misconduct is handled and under what conditions a paper can be retracted.

Use concrete language. For example, instead of saying “authors are encouraged to share data,” say “authors must deposit data in a public repository prior to acceptance.”

Once drafted, run the policies by the full editorial board. Expect pushback or confusion. That’s a good sign. It means your policies are being read and taken seriously. Allocate time to clarify intentions and adjust ambiguities without compromising ethical standards.

Step 5: Ensure Compliance with Industry Standards

Editorial policies don’t exist in a vacuum. They’re part of a broader publishing ecosystem. Make sure your updated policies comply with:

  • COPE Guidelines: The Committee on Publication Ethics provides flowcharts and best practices for a range of topics, including handling complaints and retracting papers.
  • ICMJE Recommendations: Widely accepted in medical publishing, but increasingly used in other disciplines for authorship and disclosure standards.
  • DOAJ Criteria: Especially relevant for open access journals aiming for indexing.
  • Plan S / cOAlition S: For journals wanting to remain funder-compliant in Europe and beyond.
  • Crossref and DataCite: For policies around metadata, persistent identifiers, and open citations.

You don’t need to list every compliance framework in your policy, but you do need to ensure that it is aligned. For example, if Plan S requires that articles be licensed under CC BY, your copyright policy should reflect that, not contradict it.

Also consider language inclusivity, accessibility, and interoperability with indexing platforms. Metadata-driven compliance is becoming just as important as text-based policy alignment.

Step 6: Communicate the Changes Clearly

A policy is only as good as its communication strategy. Once approved, you must launch the new policies clearly and transparently.

Start by posting them prominently on your website, ideally on a dedicated “Policies” page. Use clear headings, sub-sections, and FAQs to aid navigation.

Next, notify stakeholders. Send a detailed announcement to your authors, reviewers, and editorial board. Highlight major changes, explain the rationale behind them, and include a timeline for implementation. Make it easy for stakeholders to ask questions or raise concerns.

If your journal is part of a larger publisher, ask them to feature the changes in newsletters or blogs. Use social media (particularly LinkedIn and X) to signal the update to the academic community.

Be prepared to offer guidance for several weeks. Set up an internal FAQ for the editorial office and respond to inquiries promptly. A policy change that creates chaos is a missed opportunity.

Workshops or short webinars can be useful for onboarding editors and reviewers into the revised workflow. Consider creating a printable version or quick-reference guide for peer reviewers.

Step 7: Monitor, Review, and Iterate

You’re not done. Editorial policy management is an ongoing process. Review your policies annually, or at least every two years, to ensure they remain current with evolving practices.

Create a version history of your policies, documenting when and why each update occurred. This will help future editors, ensure transparency, and aid compliance with audits or reapplication to indexing databases.

Also, monitor metrics. Are submission numbers changing? Are more manuscripts being desk-rejected due to non-compliance? Are reviewers flagging AI use more often?

Solicit feedback. Use brief surveys for authors and reviewers to learn if policies are clear and helpful. If they aren’t, revise again. Flexibility is a strength, not a flaw.

Implement a standing agenda item in editorial board meetings to review emerging issues and potential policy gaps. A culture of regular refinement keeps your journal adaptive and aligned with current expectations.

Ultimately, strong editorial policies don’t just protect a journal; they also protect its reputation. They build trust. And in today’s publishing landscape, trust is the most valuable currency a journal can hold.

Conclusion

Revising editorial policies may not sound thrilling, but it’s one of the most powerful levers an editor can pull to modernize a journal. It’s where values meet structure, and where principles are translated into practice.

In a world where AI can generate manuscripts in minutes, research misconduct is increasingly sophisticated, and open science is rewriting the rules of access and authorship, updated editorial policies are a necessity, not a luxury.

Don’t wait for a crisis. Take control of your journal’s future by ensuring its policies are smart, clear, ethical, and aligned with the times. The editors who lead policy reform today are the ones whose journals will still be trusted tomorrow.

Leave a comment