Editorial independence at Sage

Sage Publishing is committed to ensuring that the commercial interests of the business do not have any impact or influence on individual editorial decision making and peer-review processes.  Sage upholds editorial independence as a key principle and our journal editors have full authority over the article selection and peer review process.  This is in accordance with COPE, WAME and ICMJE guidance on best practice. As a publisher, we have a responsibility to uphold editorial independence and enable legitimate free expression supported by academic rigor. We also play an important role in maintaining best practice and editorial accountability. We expect that the Editors will make decisions on submissions based on validity of their conclusions, contribution to the base of knowledge and in accordance with the journal’s policies and procedures, not the commercial implications for the Publisher.  

The following statement supports Sage’s position on the importance of independent editorial decision making.  

• Editors have full independence in deciding which submissions should enter peer-review, and may choose to reject submissions without any external input, if they are not of sufficient interest or standard, or if they are outside the journal’s scope.   
• Editorial decisions to accept submissions must be based on the input of two or more independent peer-reviewers who are experts in the study topic and the Editor’s own assessment of the submission.  
• Any complaints about editorial decisions must be addressed by the Journal Editor or the Editorial Board.  
• Sage staff do not get involved in or comment on individual decisions on submissions and will work with the Journal Editor to resolve any ethical concerns brought to the Publisher.