enter search term and/or author name
If you have a conflict of interest with a submission, you should not be involved in the decision process for that submission in any capacity, as Reviewer, Associate Editor, or Editor-in-Chief.
If you are asked to participate in the reviewing of a submission and have a conflict of interest, please let the requester know and decline to participate. Most conflicts of interest can be recognized with common sense: Would an outsider who knew that you were involved in the reviewing process reasonably be concerned that you might be biased either for or against the submission because of your relationship to the authors or their research?
There is usually a conflict of interest if the submission concerns work ...
“Recent” can be read as “within the last 5 years”. Membership in an author’s Ph.D. committee should be viewed as similar to coauthorship, and the criterion of “recency” applies. But note that there is no time limit associated with the advisor/advisee relationship.
Other circumstances may create a potential conflict, requiring careful thought on a case-to-case basis.
If you are in doubt, please describe the potential conflict to the Associate Editor who requested your participation – or, if you are an Associate Editor, to the Editors-in-Chief – and ask for guidance.
Associate Editors may publish papers in TiiS. The Editors-in-Chief will choose an Associate Editor with no conflict of interest to handle the paper. As usual, this Associate Editor will not be identified to the authors of the submission.
If one of the Editors-in-Chief (EiCs) has a conflict of interest with a submission but is not an author of that submission, the other EiC will assign an Associate Editor to handle the submission. This other EiC will make the final decision. If both EiCs have a conflict of interest with a submission, the same procedure will be applied as for a submission by an EiC (see the following section).
(Note: ACM requires that a policy for this situation exist and be published on the journal’s website.)
The purpose of this policy is to address the conflict of interest that arises when an Editor-in-Chief (EiC) of an ACM journal is an author of a paper submitted to that journal.
ACM does permit an EiC to be an author of a paper in the EiC’s journal. Outright prohibition of EiC authorship is considered too severe for at least three reasons: First, it can unduly penalize the EiC’s coauthors. In several computing disciplines, the ACM Transactions is the premier – and sometimes the only – high-quality, archival venue for research publication. A strict prohibition would impact the EiC’s coauthors, especially if they were just starting their research careers. Second, a general prohibition could prevent some high-quality papers from appearing in ACM journals. ACM’s stated mission is to be the publisher of choice. Good work should be evaluated on its merits and not on the basis of authorship. Third, a prohibition could be a disincentive for leading researchers to serve as EiC, especially insofar as this prohibition would affect coauthors, in particular graduate students.
Many ACM conferences do not permit a program chair to submit papers. The three arguments given above apply with some force to ACM conferences as well; but because of the multiyear terms of EiCs, there is a more compelling case for journals than for conferences.
The procedure for processing a submission to TiiS with an EiC as an author is as follows:
As an exception, if the EiC’s paper is submitted for consideration for a special issue that is being managed by a Guest Editor, the Associate Editors will not be involved in the way described above. Instead, the Guest Editor will make the final decision. The identities of the reviewers of the EiC’s submission will not be disclosed to the EiC.
In order to avoid the possible impression of biased processing, the (implicit or explicit) standards of acceptability must be applied especially rigorously and conservatively to any paper (co)authored by an EiC; if such a submission is marginal in any way, it should be rejected.
The following pages on the ACM website supplement the TAAS-specific information given on this TAAS website by explaining in detail in ACM’s general policies concerning several issues:
This page lists a number of specific rights and responsibilities of readers, authors, reviewers, editors, and libraries, respectively.
This page probably contains all of the information you might ever need about ACM’s copyrighted works and its permissions policy.
This page explains how plagiarism is defined by ACM and how cases of (suspected) plagiarism are dealt with.
In this area, the issue of most general interest concerns the ways in which an author’s own previous publications may be reused; this issue is also addressed, in more detail, in the following document:
For more information on specific topics, see the ACM publications policies.