Editor ResourcesInternational Journal of Neuroinformatics
Editors have access to structured resources that support consistent decisions, ethical oversight, and efficient peer review management.
Resource Overview
IJNN provides editors with guidelines, templates, and workflow support to maintain quality and timeliness. These resources help standardize decisions and improve the author experience.
Editors are encouraged to review journal policies regularly and apply consistent standards across manuscripts.
Resource updates are shared when policies change.
Available Resources
- Editors guidelines and decision criteria
- Reviewer invitation templates
- Ethics and conflict checklists
- Decision letter templates
- Special issue workflows
- Editorial policy updates
Operational Tools
Manuscript Tracking
Use the editorial system to monitor reviewer progress, deadlines, and decision stages.
Reviewer Database
Access a curated list of reviewers with neuroinformatics expertise and review history.
Ethics Support
Guidance on handling plagiarism, data integrity issues, and conflicts of interest.
Decision Frameworks
Structured criteria for accept, revise, or reject decisions.
Author Communication
Templates for clear, constructive communication with authors.
Performance Metrics
Summary reports to track turnaround times and reviewer responsiveness.
Training and Onboarding
New editors receive onboarding guidance on the review system, journal policies, and decision workflows. Ongoing support is available for complex cases or ethical concerns.
We encourage editors to review updates to reporting standards and data sharing policies to maintain consistent evaluation across manuscripts.
Support Topics
- Ethics and conflict screening
- Decision letter drafting
- Managing reviewer delays
- Handling appeals
- Special issue workflows
- Policy updates and compliance
Decision Quality and Consistency
Editors should document decision rationale and ensure that reviewer comments are aligned with journal standards. When reviewer recommendations conflict, editors can request additional input or provide a balanced synthesis.
Consistent decisions strengthen author trust and reinforce the journal's commitment to fair, evidence based evaluation.
Use standardized templates to reduce variability.
Best Practices
Editors should apply consistent standards, maintain confidentiality, and document decisions clearly.
Use shared criteria to ensure fairness across manuscripts.
Provide clear rationale in decision letters and reviewer guidance.
Escalate ethical concerns to the editorial office promptly.
Monitor deadlines and follow up with reviewers as needed.
Track reviewer response times to improve workflow efficiency for each manuscript.
Need Editorial Support?
Contact the editorial office for tools, templates, or workflow assistance.
We respond quickly to complex cases and policy questions for editors as needed.
Editors Guidelines Contact the Editorial OfficeEmail: [email protected] | Response within 24 business hours | Editorial resource support available
