Policy: Conflict of Interest for Editors and Reviewers

1. Purpose:

To ensure transparency and objectivity in editorial decisions and peer review for the Incursions into the Imaginary (InImag).

2. Policy:

Editorial board members, consulting editors, and reviewers must disclose any real or potential conflicts of interest that could compromise, or appear to compromise, their impartiality in handling or reviewing manuscripts. Conflicts may be financial, personal, or intellectual.

3. Practice:

3.1. Definitions

a. Conflict of Interest: Any situation where a person could gain a personal benefit from a decision or action related to Incursions into the Imaginary.

b. Financial conflict of interest: Ownership, investments, consulting, grants, or compensation related to the manuscript’s subject.

c. Non-financial conflict of interest: Personal relationships, political or religious affiliations, or competing research interests that could influence judgment.

3.2. Procedures:

·        Editorial board members disclose conflicts annually.

·       Reviewers must declare any financial, personal, or intellectual conflicts when invited to review a manuscript.

·       The handling editor evaluates conflicts and may proceed with the review or select an alternative reviewer.

·       Editors with conflicts must notify the Editor-in-Chief, who will reassign oversight if necessary.

·       All conflicts and resolutions are documented for record-keeping.

4. Complaints

Complaints regarding potential conflicts will be reviewed by the appropriate supervising editor or the Editor-in-Chief, who will issue a written decision and maintain documentation.