On 2017 Sep 20, Valerie Matarese commented:

Editors' competencies and editing terminology: a call for improved dialog between two worlds of editors

Moher et al. offer a detailed list of competencies for “scientific editors,” by which they mean editors of scientific (particularly biomedical) journals. As they explain (with difficulty) in the first sentence, these are editors who set journal policy, oversee the peer review process, and choose manuscripts for publication. In common parlance, these are editors-in-chief, associate editors, and managing editors.

The authors acknowledge that their list of competencies may also be “useful to other types of editors at biomedical journals, such as technical editors (i.e., those responsible for substantial editing of manuscripts, including re-writing for clarity and language)”. Editors who work “at ... journals” are (or were—few remain today) usually called copyeditors or manuscript editors (as opposed to journal editors). Those few who are still employed by prestigious or well-funded journals may choose to call themselves technical editors, but technical editing and technical writing are terms used (especially in the US) to mean the preparation of reports for technical companies.

Moher et al. do not acknowledge another type of increasingly important editor, namely the authors' editor—one who edits manuscripts before they are submitted to journals and, often, between peer review and acceptance. These editors, who do not work at journals, also advise researcher-authors on journal policy, peer review practices and publishing ethics (as does the newly proposed publications officer). Unlike the publications officer, though, authors' editors have a half-century of quiet experience during which they have matured an approach to working with researcher-authors, documented in a large body of (albeit difficult to find) literature. How they edit depends on many factors, but there exists a broadly agreed nomenclature to describe the spectrum of possible activities—called “levels of edit.” These levels range from the superficial proofreading and copyediting, to language editing, substantive editing (not “substantial” editing), and developmental editing (two other pertinent language services are translation and medical writing). Many levels of edit involve the handling of scientific and technical content. Thus authors' editors are scientific editors, too.

Just as it is essential for authors' editors to know about journals' publication policies, it would be useful for journal editors to be familiar with the spectrum of editorial support that researcher-authors use to prepare fit-for-publication manuscripts. This familiarity should begin with an understanding of the editing services offered for sale by journals' very own publishers. It should also include basic knowledge of the levels of edit terminology, an awareness of the settings in which this type of editing is done (e.g. in-house institutional services, freelance professional services, online e-commerce firms), and an appreciation that editing scope and depth (hence, the quality of the edited text) vary greatly depending on the authors' needs and desires, the editors' abilities, the budget and time, and so on. Because authors' editors provide valuable services to researchers worldwide and, consequently, to journal editors, improved dialog between these two worlds of scientific editors will positively impact research publishing.

Disclosure: I have published two books on editorial support for researchers including Editing Research, a book that investigates and documents the work of authors' editors.

On 2017 Sep 20, Valerie Matarese commented:

Editors' competencies and editing terminology: a call for improved dialog between two worlds of editors

Moher et al. offer a detailed list of competencies for “scientific editors,” by which they mean editors of scientific (particularly biomedical) journals. As they explain (with difficulty) in the first sentence, these are editors who set journal policy, oversee the peer review process, and choose manuscripts for publication. In common parlance, these are editors-in-chief, associate editors, and managing editors.

The authors acknowledge that their list of competencies may also be “useful to other types of editors at biomedical journals, such as technical editors (i.e., those responsible for substantial editing of manuscripts, including re-writing for clarity and language)”. Editors who work “at ... journals” are (or were—few remain today) usually called copyeditors or manuscript editors (as opposed to journal editors). Those few who are still employed by prestigious or well-funded journals may choose to call themselves technical editors, but technical editing and technical writing are terms used (especially in the US) to mean the preparation of reports for technical companies.

Moher et al. do not acknowledge another type of increasingly important editor, namely the authors' editor—one who edits manuscripts before they are submitted to journals and, often, between peer review and acceptance. These editors, who do not work at journals, also advise researcher-authors on journal policy, peer review practices and publishing ethics (as does the newly proposed publications officer). Unlike the publications officer, though, authors' editors have a half-century of quiet experience during which they have matured an approach to working with researcher-authors, documented in a large body of (albeit difficult to find) literature. How they edit depends on many factors, but there exists a broadly agreed nomenclature to describe the spectrum of possible activities—called “levels of edit.” These levels range from the superficial proofreading and copyediting, to language editing, substantive editing (not “substantial” editing), and developmental editing (two other pertinent language services are translation and medical writing). Many levels of edit involve the handling of scientific and technical content. Thus authors' editors are scientific editors, too.

Just as it is essential for authors' editors to know about journals' publication policies, it would be useful for journal editors to be familiar with the spectrum of editorial support that researcher-authors use to prepare fit-for-publication manuscripts. This familiarity should begin with an understanding of the editing services offered for sale by journals' very own publishers. It should also include basic knowledge of the levels of edit terminology, an awareness of the settings in which this type of editing is done (e.g. in-house institutional services, freelance professional services, online e-commerce firms), and an appreciation that editing scope and depth (hence, the quality of the edited text) vary greatly depending on the authors' needs and desires, the editors' abilities, the budget and time, and so on. Because authors' editors provide valuable services to researchers worldwide and, consequently, to journal editors, improved dialog between these two worlds of scientific editors will positively impact research publishing.

Disclosure: I have published two books on editorial support for researchers including Editing Research, a book that investigates and documents the work of authors' editors.