Changing editors, evolving journal’s identity: Insights into editorial practice

Discussion about the production of scientific knowledge focuses mainly on researchers, funders, or institutions.Less attention is paid to editors, who nevertheless have significant influence over the publication of scientific knowledge.Since scientific journals are the channels through which universities, research institutes, and individual researchers present their knowledge to the world, editors become mid-level actors in the publication process and in the broader societal interaction of science (Wellington & Nixon, 2005).The role of the editor is not merely technical or administrative: editors make decisions shaping the impact of science on public and policymaking (Siler et al., 2015).A well-functioning editorial process can strengthen the quality of science, protect research from weak methods, and bring promising new ideas to light.This is visible in the concrete work of editors: they guide manuscripts from submitted texts to published articles and at the same time shape the journal's identity and scientific priorities.The field-shaping role that is described by Wellington and Nixon ( 2005) can be seen as boundary work in which editors define the internal boundaries and direction of a discipline.Editors' dual role is emphasized by the fact that they not only evaluate texts but also influence researchers' development during the process.According to Acker et al. ( 2021), editors often act as supporters of authors, particularly in the learning process of early-career researchers.Thus, editors are not only gatekeepers but also facilitators of development who participate in the social and professional construction of the research community.At the heart of editorial work is constant evaluation.Editors decide which manuscripts proceed to peer review, what kinds of reviews are emphasized, and when the editorial office needs to intervene in disagreements among reviewers.Horbach and Halffman (2020) show that editors balance several conflicting pressures in this work: scientific quality norms, support for authors, and the expectations of publishers and institutions.The editor's role is therefore ambivalent, combining enabling and delimiting, support and control, internal norms of the scientific community and external pressures of the publication system.At the time of AI-assisted or even AI-generated articles the role of editors becomes even more crucial.The editor is here as well the first gatekeeper to control for the proper use of AI.At FJSR we are currently working on the AI guidelines for submissions and considering what is and what is not reasonable AI-use in research.Already there have been submissions also in FJSR that have been desk rejected in part due to poor quality likely resulting from the extensive use of AI in the writing process or even AI-generation of the whole article.With this issue, the editorial team's term at Finnish Journal of Social Research comes to a close.Editorial transitions are always turning points for a journal's identity and practices.Moments like this are also good opportunities to reflect on editorial work.Analyzing editorial labor serves as a reminder that every published text is part of a shared process in which editors and authors together construct scientific discussion.