Editors

Editors and editors-in-chief play a vital role throughout the publication process, from forming the editorial board through the publication of manuscripts. Their research expertise and leadership help strengthen the quality and overall content of the journal while supporting open access.

Editors are expected to take responsibility for their journals and monitor the complete publication process. Auctores invites scientists, researchers, academicians, medical practitioners, and scholars with relevant expertise to serve as editors. The Auctores portfolio includes more than 40 peer-reviewed journals across science and technology.

1. 1The author submits a manuscript and receives a tracking number.
2. 2An editor is assigned to the manuscript.
3. 3The editorial team decides whether the manuscript should proceed to review. If it is not sent for review, the editor communicates the decision to the author.
4. 4The editor identifies and invites suitable reviewers, and the author is notified that the manuscript is under review.
5. 5Reviewers agree to assess the manuscript.
6. 6Reviewers submit their reports to the editor.
7. 7The editorial team considers the reports and the editor makes the final decision. Further consultation or editor-mediated communication may be used when appropriate.
8. 8The editor communicates the decision to the author.
9. 9If the decision is negative, the author may be offered the option of transferring the manuscript to another Auctores journal. Where applicable, referee comments may also be transferred.

Auctores journals are committed to providing a high standard of service during submission and peer review. When the editors of one journal decide that they cannot offer publication, the manuscript-transfer facility can allow authors to resubmit their existing materials to another suitable Auctores journal.

If a manuscript was reviewed previously within the Auctores portfolio, the author may be able to transfer the referee reports through a link supplied by the handling editor. The receiving journal will decide how much weight to give those reports and may request additional or alternative reviews.

Manuscripts should be submitted through the online submission system. Each new submission receives a tracking number and is assigned to a primary editor, who reads the paper, consults other editors when needed, and decides whether it should proceed to peer review.

Authors should disclose whether the work has been discussed with a specific Auctores editor before submission. Some papers may be relevant to the field but unlikely to compete successfully with the strongest submissions; an editor may therefore decide not to send them for external review.

If the importance of a paper is unclear, an editor may seek advice from outside experts before deciding whether to review it. Novelty can be affected by significant conceptual overlap with a published or accepted paper, while a properly disclosed preprint does not by itself compromise novelty.

Authors choosing to transfer previous reviews should explain the relationship between the current manuscript and the earlier submission and, where relevant, provide a point-by-point response to the referee comments. Editors may sometimes accept a high-quality paper without another full review, but serious criticisms will be considered carefully.

The corresponding author is notified by email when the editor sends a manuscript for review. Authors may suggest referees; suggestions can be useful but are not binding on the editor. Referees are normally not identified to authors, except where a referee requests disclosure under the applicable journal policy.

Authors may request double-blind review so that their names and affiliations are withheld from reviewers. Conceptually similar manuscripts should be held to consistent editorial standards and may be sent to the same referees. When related papers are submitted together, each manuscript must independently meet the publication criteria.

When making a post-review decision, editors consider both the current quality of the paper and whether the authors can reasonably address the concerns. Where the concerns appear resolvable within six months or less, the editor may invite a revised manuscript.

Decision letters may distinguish between referee requests that must be addressed and suggestions that remain at the author’s discretion. The revised manuscript is normally sent to some or all of the original referees. The letter states a deadline, and revisions returned within that period retain their original submission date.

If concerns are too serious to resolve within six months, the editor will normally reject the manuscript. Where the work remains potentially interesting, the editor may invite a future resubmission. A resubmitted paper may be sent to the original referees or to new referees at the editor’s discretion, and it will not retain the earlier submission date.

Every invited revision should be submitted through the revision link in the decision letter rather than as a new manuscript. The cover letter should provide a point-by-point response and explain how the manuscript was changed.

A final-submission request is sent when a paper is close to publication. It identifies remaining editorial changes and may include detailed formatting comments from the copy editor. Manuscripts may be edited substantially so that the text and figures are clear to non-specialists and conform to the journal’s style.

Authors should use the revision link to upload the final text with all requested format changes. High-resolution electronic figure files should be uploaded or sent separately when requested. The paper is formally accepted after all remaining editorial issues have been resolved.

The received date is the date of the original submission, or the resubmission where the earlier paper was rejected. The accepted date is the date on which the editor sends the acceptance letter. Authors receive proofs and may discuss proposed changes, while Auctores retains the final decision on style and figure dimensions.

Authors may ask the editors to reconsider a rejection even when resubmission was not invited. Appeals are considered alongside the normal editorial workload. Auctores aims to provide a decision within 14 days, although complex appeals can take longer.

An appeal is successful only when the editors conclude that the original decision was made in error or that critical new information or data has been provided. If the manuscript was reviewed, the editor may consult one or more of the original referees or seek advice from another referee. If it was not reviewed, informal advice from external experts may be requested.