Assessing the Academic Editor's decision
Assessing the Academic Editor's decision
Editor Center > Academic Editor invitations > Academic Editor decisions
Navigate the process of reviewing decision letters and determining your next steps. Your role is essential in ensuring decisions reflect reviewer feedback and meet publication standards.
As a Section Editor, you play a critical role in adjudicating Academic Editors’ decisions. Your input helps maintain quality and transparency. If a decision letter needs refinement, you can guide the Academic Editor with constructive feedback.
You are expected to take action when the Academic Editor submits their decision to you. If you are not able to complete your assignment(s) for any reason, please contact your journal office as soon as possible.
This guidance applies to PLOS Aging and Health, PLOS Complex Systems, PLOS Computational Biology, PLOS Digital Health, PLOS Ecosystems, PLOS Genetics, PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, PLOS Pathogens, and PLOS Sustainability and Transformation only.
What to assess
Editorial decisions should combine publication criteria and reviewer feedback when applicable to ensure manuscripts meet our standards. You must review the decision letter quality to determine your next action.
The decision letter
We provide guidance to Academic Editors on what makes a good decision letter in our Assessing reviews and making decisions guide. Please use this guide to evaluate whether the letter has met the required standards.
If the Academic Editor has provided minimal or no comments in the decision letter, this may be acceptable provided the recommended decision aligns with the reviewer reports. However, if there is concerning behaviour in the reviews (for example, citation stacking) that the Academic Editor has not addressed, or if they recommend a reject or reject and transfer decision without justification, the letter should be returned to them to address.
Peer review reports
Assess the reviewer reports to ensure they are substantive, that the reviewers’ expertise is appropriate for the manuscript, and that there are no violations of the Ethical Peer Review policy. This includes issues such as excessive self-citation or inappropriate use of generative artificial intelligence.
If you identify any ethical concerns, do not edit or remove reviewer comments. Please proceed to contact your journal office.
Taking your next action
You will need to review the quality of the decision letter to determine whether to send this to the author or to request improvements.
Typically, you will agree with the Academic Editor’s recommended decision. However, you are not required to do so. You may override the recommendation if you believe a different decision is more appropriate. If you choose to do this, please provide clear feedback explaining your reasoning so the Academic Editor can understand your decision.
Your options
To support you, we have outlined the available options based on the quality of the decision letter, and what happens next:
Forward the decision to the author
Proceed with this option when the letter is of good quality.
- For minor or major revisions, select Submit Decision with Draft Letter.
- For Reject, Reject and Transfer, or Accept, select Send Now.
Open a Discussion with the Academic Editor
Proceed with this option to address the decision letter when it needs improvement.
- You may add your own comments to the decision letter, but only after discussing the matter with the Academic Editor.
Providing feedback to the Academic Editor
If the decision letter needs improvement, offer specific and constructive suggestions to help the Academic Editor to write letters of better quality in the future. You may reference the Assessing reviews and making decisions guidance to support your feedback.
If the decision letter is well written and thoughtful, please acknowledge this. Both constructive and positive feedback are valuable and appreciated.
After the decision
If the author is required to make minor or major revisions, they will revise and resubmit their manuscript. Revised submissions are returned directly to the Academic Editor for the next decision.
If the Academic Editor is unavailable when the revision is submitted, the manuscript will be reassigned to you. At that point, you may choose to invite a new Academic Editor or continue handling the manuscript yourself, depending on the nature of the revisions.
Explore more editorial resources
Information and how to contact us
Code of conduct for editorial board members
Frequently asked questions
