Who must disclose
Voting editors, Junior Editors, faculty sponsors, ad hoc reviewers, authors, and other participants must disclose a relationship or interest that could reasonably affect—or appear to affect—their impartiality or the interpretation of the work.
Relevant circumstances include:
- teaching or current supervision of an author;
- serving as the paper’s faculty sponsor;
- coauthorship or substantial contribution to the paper;
- employment or another professional relationship connected to an author, organization, dataset, funder, or outcome;
- a financial interest related to the paper;
- a close personal relationship;
- a family relationship;
- an active dispute with an author or another decision-maker;
- prior advocacy for or against the paper that compromises impartiality; or
- any other circumstance in which the participant cannot remain impartial.
Authors must also disclose relevant funding, employment, financial, institutional, or personal interests that could affect how readers assess the research.
Determining recusal
The person with the potential conflict must disclose it promptly and must not decide their own eligibility. The remaining non-conflicted voting editors determine whether recusal is required and define any access restriction.
Teaching, supervision, or faculty sponsorship does not prevent mentorship. It must be disclosed, and the faculty sponsor cannot be the sole approving editor for a paper they sponsored or supervised.
Effect of recusal
A recused editor or reviewer is removed from:
- deliberation on the affected paper or action;
- voting or approval;
- deciding an appeal; and
- access to confidential material not needed for a remaining operational duty.
The private record identifies the disclosure, determination, eligible decision-makers, access restriction, and any ad hoc appointment. The public paper record does not expose unnecessary personal or confidential details.
Required independent approval
A paper must be approved by at least two non-conflicted voting editors, including at least one Faculty Editor. If that group cannot be formed, the Editorial Board may appoint a qualified UNLV faculty member as an ad hoc reviewer for the paper.
A post-publication action follows the authority stated in Corrections, Revisions & Versioning or Expressions of Concern, Withdrawal & Takedown. An appeal is decided by a non-conflicted Faculty Editor who was not responsible for the original decision, or by an appointed ad hoc UNLV faculty reviewer.
Making a disclosure
Use the Contact page and identify the paper, decision, or role involved. Describe the relationship sufficiently for a conflict review, but do not send restricted research data, student records, or sensitive personal evidence through ordinary email. The Series will arrange an appropriate private channel when needed.