The following document constitutes a formal policy of EP Journals Group. It is intended to be read together with related policies and guidance notes published by the organisation. This policy applies to all journals under the EP Journals Group imprint and is implemented across the organisation on a continuing basis.
Publication frequency across the portfolio is monthly. Where timelines are referenced, they are stated as typical timeframes and may vary by discipline, submission volume, and the requirements of the peer review process. The organisation retains the right to apply additional checks where warranted by a specific case.
Editorial independence
EP Journals Group maintains editorial independence as a foundational governance requirement. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, relevance to scope, methodological quality, and contribution to the academic record. Commercial, political, or reputational considerations are not treated as legitimate grounds for editorial acceptance.
The organisation does not designate hierarchical editorial titles that concentrate authority. Editorial boards are treated as collective bodies. Editorial responsibility is distributed and documented through routine editorial procedures.
Decision-making and documentation
Decisions may include rejection, major revision, minor revision, or acceptance. Decisions are typically based on reviewer reports and editorial assessment. Where a decision departs from reviewer recommendations, an internal note may be recorded to document the rationale.
The organisation recognises that editorial judgement may differ across disciplines. Variations in emphasis are accepted where they remain within the boundaries of transparency and integrity.
Editorial conflicts of interest
Editors should not handle manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest. Conflicts may be financial, institutional, collaborative, competitive, or personal. Where a conflict exists, another qualified editor should be assigned.
Where an editor is an author on a submission, the organisation applies additional safeguards to preserve fairness. Editorial handling is reassigned and documented.
Complaints, appeals, and procedural review
Complaints about editorial handling are evaluated on the basis of procedure, documentation, and substantive evidence. Appeals are reviewed where a material procedural deficiency is credibly alleged. The organisation may consult additional editors or reviewers when reassessing a decision.
Editorial reconsideration is not treated as an entitlement. The organisation preserves the right to maintain a decision where due process was followed and where the scholarly judgement was reasonable.
Policy enquiries
Enquiries regarding interpretation or application of this policy may be directed to the editorial office. Correspondence should identify the relevant journal (if applicable), the manuscript or article identifier (if applicable), and a concise description of the issue.
Email: editor@ep-journals.org