Genuine Experts, Genuine Consent, Genuine Coverage
A credible editorial board consists of subject experts with real, verifiable expertise in the journal's actual scope, each of whom has expressly agreed to be listed. Together they should cover enough of the field to support real peer review, show reasonable geographic and institutional variety, and operate under clear conflict-of-interest rules. A board put together just to look large or established — with unrelated names, no verifiable consent, or no link to the stated scope — is among the plainest signs of a badly run or predatory journal. Reading a few members' own publications quickly shows whether the fit is real.
Naming a person to an editorial board without their explicit, documented consent is a grave ethical breach rather than a small slip — it is a recognised predatory-journal tactic that harms real researchers' reputations.
Common Editorial Board Roles
Editor-in-Chief
Overall editorial responsibility together with the last word on decisions.
Associate/Section Editors
Take on particular subject areas or manuscript types within the journal's scope.
Editorial Board Members
Give policy advice, assist with review and help uphold standards.
Selection Criteria
- Proven subject-matter expertise that fits the journal's declared scope
- An institutional affiliation anyone can verify independently
- A real record of publications or professional work in the field
- Geographic and institutional variety across the board overall
- Readiness to give real time to review and editorial duties
- Explicit, documented agreement to be listed and to serve
Conflict-of-Interest Essentials
Board members should step back from any manuscript involving a personal, financial or institutional conflict — a co-author, a close colleague, a direct competitor or a funding tie — and declare the relationship before any decision is taken. A conflict-of-interest policy that is published and actually enforced protects both the journal's credibility and each board member's professional reputation. Authors can apply the same test when choosing a journal: look for a policy that is written down and easy to find.
Board-Building Checklist
- Each member listed has given explicit, documented consent
- Each member's affiliation can be verified independently
- The board's coverage fits the journal's declared scope
- Reasonable diversity across regions and institutions has been reached
- A conflict-of-interest policy is published and known to every member
- A procedure is in place to refresh the board list when membership changes
Practical Steps for Recruiting Editorial Board Members
A board is only credible when its members are real, willing and active. These suggestions help founding editors approach scholars respectfully and set up a board that genuinely contributes.
- Write a clear invitation. Explain the journal's scope, the expected duties and the approximate time commitment in your first message. Honest invitations attract committed people and lower the chance of later withdrawals.
- Obtain explicit written consent. Never list anyone before they have agreed in writing. Keep their reply on file, since a name displayed without permission damages trust quickly.
- Balance subject coverage. Map the topics you expect to receive and make sure there is a qualified editor for each area. Gaps become obvious when manuscripts arrive that nobody on the board can assess.
- Define handling rules for conflicts. Agree how editors will step aside when a submission comes from a colleague, student or collaborator. A written rule protects both the member and the journal's reputation.
- Review membership regularly. Check that each member still wishes to serve and remains active, and update the public list promptly. An outdated board suggests neglect even when the journal is run well.
Invite openly, record consent in writing, cover your subjects honestly and keep the public board list current.
Recruiting Board Members
- Spot gaps in expertise — subject by subject
- Invite active researchers — who have published work
- Set out duties plainly — time and tasks
- Secure written consent — to be named on the board
- Reassess membership each year — add or remove members
Displaying the Board
Full names
With titles.
Affiliations
Institution and country.
Profile links
Pages from the institution, or an ORCID record.
Roles
The Editor-in-Chief, associate editors and board members.
Editorial Board FAQs
How many editorial board members should a new journal have?
There is no set figure — covering the declared scope's subjects matters more than the number of names.
Must members agree to being listed?
Yes, without exception — listing someone without consent is a grave ethical breach.
How does an Editor-in-Chief differ from a board member?
The Editor-in-Chief has the last word on decisions, while board members advise and support review in their own field.
Why is geographic diversity important?
It indicates an editorial process that is truly open and outward-looking, not narrow and inward-facing.
Which conflict-of-interest rules ought to apply?
Stepping aside from manuscripts involving a personal, financial or institutional conflict, and disclosing it before any decision.
How can I confirm a listed board member exists?
Look up their institutional profile yourself instead of depending only on the journal's own list.
Can the board's membership change over time?
Yes — what counts is that the current list correctly shows who is serving now.
Must members have published within the exact scope?
The key requirement is demonstrated, relevant subject expertise, usually evidenced by their own track record.
What do board members typically do?
They give policy advice, help with peer review, take part in special issues and keep standards high.
May a journal list someone without their consent?
No. Doing so is a serious ethics breach.
What size should a board be?
Big enough to cover the journal’s subjects with genuine expertise.
Related Searches
Read Next
Got a Completed Paper Instead?
Send it straight to JMVRA's current call for papers.
Submit Paper OnlineAt-a-Glance Checklist
- Roles definedWith their duties
- Expertise verifiedField publications
- Consent on recordPrior to naming members
- Conflicts disclosedDealt with openly
- Annual board reviewInactive entries refreshed
Your Paper's Journey at JMVRA, From Submission to Publication
- SubmitA paper ID is issued
- ScreenScope & similarity
- ReviewDouble-blind
- DecideEmail & SMS
- ReviseAnswer every point
- AcceptCopyright & fee
- ProduceDOI available on request
- PublishMonthly issue
How long review takes depends on the reviewers and on any revision required, so no set turnaround is promised; you are told of acceptance or rejection by email and WhatsApp.
Ready to Publish? Submit to JMVRA
JMVRA is aligned with UGC's Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.
JMVRA is a Transparent, Peer-Reviewed, Open Access Journal (Refereed Journal). Following the discontinuation of the UGC and UGC-CARE journal listing, and in alignment with the latest UGC-CARE recommendations and guidelines, JMVRA is aligned with UGC’s Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.
Helpful pages on jmvra.org
Key Terms
Subjects and search phrases this article addresses.
Related Reading
Further reading on the same theme from the JMVRA blog.
How Articles Reach OpenAlex
Read the guide RelatedConference Proceedings at JMVRA: How Review Works
Read the guide RelatedExplaining Peer Review Transparency: Published Reports, Named Reviewers and the Position of JMVRA
Read the guide RelatedAcademia.edu, ResearchGate and Google Scholar Compared: Which to Choose
Read the guide RelatedTerms & Conditions
Read the guide RelatedJW Book: Self-Publish With ISBN and Global Reach
Read the guideKeep Reading on the JMVRA Blog
This guide belongs to the JMVRA journal blog, which offers practical advice on publishing, indexing, metrics and research integrity, written to be checkable instead of promotional.