EHASS - Emanate - Highlights from the Drug Abuse and Addiction Studies Sessions

Editorial Independence

Emanate Publishing House Ltd. (EPH) emphasizes editorial independence, free from undue influence by sponsors, aligning with COPE’s Core Practices. This is consistent with WoS requirements for editorial freedom and unbiased decision-making.

Peer Review Policy

EPH employs rigorous peer review for all submissions, with either single or double-blind processes. Reviewers are selected based on expertise, publication history, and knowledge, while avoiding conflicts of interest. This process is in line with WoS's emphasis on rigorous peer review to ensure the quality and integrity of research.

Peer Review Workflow

EPH allows organizers/volume editors to use any manuscript management system but mandates adherence to global peer review standards. WoS values transparency and adherence to ethical standards in peer review, which EPH seems to uphold.

Manuscript Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess manuscripts on originality, methodological soundness, consistency, relevance, and adherence to technical specifications. This thorough evaluation mirrors WoS’s focus on high-quality, relevant, and original research.

Editorial Responsibilities

EPH’s editorial team adheres to COPE guidelines, ensuring content originality and accuracy, which is crucial for WoS inclusion.

Transparency and Recognition in Peer Review

Ethical Adherence

All parties involved in the publication process must align with Emanate Publishing House Ltd’s Ethical and Peer Review Policies. This is essential for WoS, which demands high ethical standards.

Content Responsibility

The responsibility for content, perspectives, and recommendations lies solely with the authors, which is a standard practice in academic publishing and is consistent with WoS policies.