Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement of Hydrological Research Letters (HRL)
HRL Editorial Board, Japan Society of Hydrology and Water Resources
9th July, 2015
Japan Society of Hydrology and Water Resources (JSHWR) is a trans-disciplinary academic society, composed of various scientific fields. Hydrological Research Letters (HRL) is an international journal published by JSHWR, in collaboration with Japanese Association of Groundwater Hydrology (JAGH) and Japanese Association of Hydrological Sciences (JAHS), aiming at rapid exchange and outgoing of information in these fields. In order to develop the scientific fields of hydrology and water resources, the accumulation of original data is important as well as the publication of original ideas. This “ethics and statement” is prepared to become thorough the publication policy of HRL.
1. Chief and associate editors should be unbiased among authors, reviewers, and the corresponding editor.
2. An associate editor should closely cooperate with the corresponding editor, edit the manuscript fairly and evenly, determine and report the acceptance of rejection of the manuscript to the Editorial Board.
3. Chief and associate editors should maximally respect the decision of the corresponding editor and reviewers. If chief and associate editors reject their decision, they should ask the corresponding editor and reviewers the process to the decision and why they come to it, then, explain the reason of the rejection of their decision in a careful manner to be understood.
4. Chief, associate, and corresponding editors should not impose personal opinions and methodology to authors.
5. Chief, associate, and corresponding editors should not depend on the obscure standard such as “level and superiority of the paper” when they decide the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.
6. Every manuscript has new findings and information, which is sometimes invaluable for other readers.
・ Corresponding editors handle reviewer’s comments, however, the editors leave the authors to reply the comments. The editors should not ask the authors to revise the small matters excessively. Even if the authors don’t accept the comments, the editors should not come to the decision of reject if the authors explain the reason rationally.
・ When the revised manuscript is submitted, corresponding editors should accept it if the authors properly reply to the comments unless fatal errors are apparent, even if opinions among reviewers, the editors, and the authors are different.
7. Corresponding editors and reviewers should keep the deadline of the review. They should not delay the publication beyond necessity.
8. Chief, associate, corresponding editors and reviewers must not cite results of papers without the permission of authors. If they want to cite the results, they have to ask the authors for the permission in advance.
9. If chief, associate, and corresponding editors convince the fact that published paper contains fatal errors, they should publish an appropriate paper pointing out the errors and, if possible, correcting them.