The Editorial Board holds final Series publication and policy authority. The broader Editorial Team may support screening, metadata, document preparation, accessibility, and issue production, but support duties do not confer voting authority.
Editorial Board authority
The Board oversees:
- scope and eligibility;
- editorial and compliance screening;
- publication decisions and issue planning;
- corrections, revisions, status notices, restrictions, and withdrawals;
- public policies and their review; and
- coordination of deposited records with OAsis.
Current public members and roles appear on the Editorial Board page. Institutional titles identify a person’s university position; Series titles identify authority under the Series governance framework.
Voting rule
A paper must be approved by at least two non-conflicted voting editors, including at least one Faculty Editor. A faculty sponsor may mentor and recommend a paper but cannot be its sole approving editor.
If fewer than two non-conflicted voting editors are available, the Board may appoint a qualified UNLV faculty member as an ad hoc reviewer for that paper. A private decision record documents the eligible voting pool, conflict disclosures, recusals, approvers, conditions, outcome, and date.
Junior Editors and support roles
Junior Editors assist with initial screening, metadata review, manuscript preparation, accessibility checks, and issue production. They may make recommendations but do not independently accept or reject papers and do not vote.
Temporary editorial, metadata, accessibility, or production support likewise operates within assigned duties and does not gain publication authority by performing technical work.
Decisions and records
Valid editorial outcomes are:
- Accepted for publication
- Accepted subject to specified revisions
- Revise and resubmit
- Deferred to a later issue
- Declined
The public record reports the appropriate outcome or paper status. Confidential deliberation, ballots, reviewer identities, conflict details, consent evidence, and unpublished materials remain in authorized private systems under applicable records requirements.
Conflicts and appeals
Every decision-maker must follow the Conflicts of Interest & Recusal policy. An original decision-maker may not decide an appeal of that decision. Appeals follow the Appeals policy.
Policy review and change control
The Board reviews its governance and public policies at least annually and after a material change to authority, eligibility, editorial process, repository workflow, rights, privacy, accessibility, or retention.
Editorial wording or implementation changes that do not alter policy require the Managing Editor and one non-conflicted voting editor. Material policy changes require two non-conflicted voting editors, including a Faculty Editor. Appointment changes require written acceptance and an effective date in the private record before the public configuration is treated as confirmed.
A code change, pull request, or deployment does not substitute for required editorial, author, faculty, university, library, or records approval.