Soft skills in editorial and communicational management of scientific journals

 

Jorge Manuel Cueva Estrada

Salesian Polytechnic University. Ecuador.

jcueva@ups.edu.ec 

Nicolás Armando Sumba-Nacipucha

Salesian Polytechnic University. Ecuador.

nsumba@ups.edu.ec 

Jorge Luis García Alcaraz

Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez. Mexico

jorge.garcia@uacj.mx

Rafael Ravina Ripoll

University of Cádiz. Spain

rafael.ravina@uca.es  

 This article is part of the research project “Alternative Economic Models for Transformative Growth with Sustainability and Workplace Well-being,” approved by Resolution No. 047-003-2025-05-22 and carried out by the Socio-Economic and Business Research Group (GISEE) at the Salesian Polytechnic University of Ecuador.

 

How to cite this article / Standard reference:

Cueva Estrada, Jorge Manuel; Sumba-Nacipucha, Nicolás Armando; García Alcaraz, Jorge Luis, & Ravina Ripoll, Rafael (2027). Habilidades blandas en la gestión editorial y comunicacional de revistas científicas [Soft Skills in Editorial and Communicational Management of Scientific Journals]. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 85, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2027-2612

 

Date of Receipt: Oct. 01, 2025 
Date of Acceptance: Nov. 12, 2025 
Expected Date of Publication: Feb. 16, 2026
Date of Publication: Jan. 01, 2027

 

ABSTRACT

Introduction: In the context of the digital economy, the editorial management of scientific journals combines technical and normative demands with constant interaction among authors, reviewers, and editors. Although indexing metrics and prestige have been widely studied, there remains a gap regarding the influence of soft skills on perceived quality and the international positioning of journals. Methodology: This was a quantitative, descriptive, correlational, and comprhensive study. An online survey was administered to faculty-researchers with recent experience in publication processes. The questionnaire included nine descriptive questions, sixteen Likert-scale items measuring soft skills, and one open-ended question. Frequencies, Spearman's correlation, and the Kruskal– Wallis test were applied. Results: A total of 394 researchers participated. Most reported favorable perceptions across the four dimensions, although variations emerged according to indexing level. Correlations between soft skills and indexing were negative and significant, and the Kruskal– Wallis test confirmed differences in mean ranks. Discussion: Higher prestige and indexing were associated with lower perceptions of human engagement in editorial management, aligning with studies that highlight the divergence between technical excellence and relational quality. Conclusions: A higher perceived level of soft skills is associated with a more favorable author evaluation of the editorial experience and process. We recommend complementing performance metrics with indicators of perceived editorial interaction.

Keywords: soft skills, editorial management, scientific journals, indexing; digital economy; internationalization.

1. INTRODUCTION

The use of technological tools, widely applied in the business world to optimize processes and make data-driven decisions (Díaz-Duarte et al., 2025), along with fluid and structured digital communication, strengthens internal collaboration and employee well-being (Soler-Sanchis et al., 2025). Additionally, the literature on organizational leadership shows that transformational and transactional leadership styles influence the social, operational, and environmental performance of organizations (Mendoza-Solis et al., 2025), demonstrating that effective management combines technological resources with human skills focused on inspiration, motivation, and support. This same principle of technological and relational integration should be applied to editorial management. In this field, digital platforms for manuscript tracking and communication tools have ensured greater transparency and improved interaction among authors, reviewers, and editors (Fiorillo & Mehta, 2024). These technological advances characteristic of the digital economy have transformed the way science is produced and disseminated, accelerating the transition to a knowledge economy in which information, innovation, and intellectual capital are considered strategic resources for development (Cueva Estrada & Sánchez-Bayón, 2024). Consequently, scientific journals are becoming established as channels for disseminating knowledge, promoting international cooperation, and meeting the quality demands inherent in scientific outreach.

In recent years, the pressure to meet international quality and indexing standards has led editorial work to focus on technical and regulatory aspects such as: complying with indexing criteria, respecting review timelines, and ensuring transparency in peer review. This also includes requiring articles to present sound methodologies, rigorous statistical analyses, and verifiable evidence to support their findings (Hernández Pina & Maquilón Sánchez, 2010; Jiménez-Hidalgo et al., 2008), as well as promoting the publication's visibility to broaden its reach and consolidate its position (Cueva et al., 2023; Sumba Nacipucha et al., 2024). All of this is undoubtedly essential for legitimizing and enhancing the impact of publications, and it has been studied extensively, with research documenting good editorial practices and indexing policies in different contexts (Penna & Franco, 2024; Raudales-García et al., 2024; Salas Zendejo et al., 2025).

In addition to technical criteria, editorial work also involves constant interaction with authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial team. It is precisely within this framework that other, less analyzed skills come into play: the so-called soft skills. Empathy, active listening, clear communication, emotional intelligence, and conflict resolution are qualities that, although not always visible, influence the experience of those who publish and how the quality of a journal is perceived (Mkumbo & Mosha, 2024), as well as improving the work environment and the well-being of the editorial team as a whole (Galiano-Coronil & Blanco-Moreno, 2024). However, it is still unclear to what extent these skills impact aspects such as the visibility or internationalization of publications.

And although research has already been conducted on editorial quality and indexing processes (Mkumbo & Mosha, 2024; Paz Enrique & Rodríguez Torres, 2025), further investigation is needed into the relationship between the soft skills of the editorial team and the level of internationalization of journals. Studying this phenomenon would allow the observation of the extent to which the human factor influences the reach and recognition of scientific publications. Therefore, in editorial management, it is important to consider technical aspects, but without neglecting the role of people in this dynamic. Observing both dimensions helps to gain a broader understanding of how scientific journals operate today and the challenges they face.

1.1. Technical and Human Dimension in Editorial Management

Rozemblum et al. (2015) describe editorial management as a process involving a set of complex and structured activities, from revision to publication. They point out that specialized indexes evaluate these processes based on different quality criteria, requiring editors to work rigorously and rely on large, specialized teams. This integrates technical skills with the management of various interpersonal abilities. To this management must be added the capacity for innovation, which, according to Gilmet (2020), requires a proactive attitude, adaptability, and a willingness to learn continuously. This is especially important considering the trend toward open access and the ongoing digital transformation.

 Along these lines, Keeling Álvarez and Alfonso Manzanet (2024) and Hernández García de Velazco and Chumaceiro Hernández (2025) add that the strength of scientific journals depends, to a large extent, on the commitment of the people who make each stage of the editorial process possible, given the high levels of management this entails. They highlight research ethics, responsible authorship, the replicability of studies, and a commitment to quality as key pillars. This aligns with Marcó del Pont-Lalli and Martínez-Navarro (2022), who point out that publication delays are not solely due to peer review, but also to internal factors such as the organization and the editorial team's capacity to monitor each stage of the process. Therefore, the importance of maintaining committed reviewers through empathetic and collaborative management is evident.

Rodríguez Yunta and Tejada Artigas (2013) argue that personal competencies are complementary and necessary for achieving truly professional editorial management in scientific journals. Unlike technical or professional skills, these competencies focus on the attitudes and values that define the role of the editor and their team. They can become a differentiating factor for the journal, potentially improving or increasing its positioning and visibility. Among these competencies, they highlight ethics, to guarantee fair review and editing processes; a commitment to quality, reflected in the effort to meet the expectations of both readers and authors and to ensure the excellence of the content; the ability to resolve conflicts among reviewers, authors, or team members; and a predisposition toward collaborative and empathetic work, which strengthens relationships and improves the overall editorial experience.

Therefore, the editor's ability to communicate clearly and establish sustained relationships with authors, reviewers, and committees is fundamental. Their work includes continuous and proactive communication, since a lack of response or prolonged silence negatively affects the journal's image and discourages future collaborations (De La Hoz Suárez et al., 2024). In this context, Aguado-López and Becerril-García (2021) argue that when review deadlines are prolonged or uncertain, the author's expectations and trust deteriorate, affecting their perception of the editorial process. Evidence from Spanish communication journals shows variability in time management between stages of the editorial process and between journals, which supports the need for transparency and adherence to editorial deadlines (Segarra-Saavedra et al., 2023). Therefore, proactively managing deadlines is not only an operational matter but also a relational skill that improves communication and the author's perception of the process.

Based on the above, transparency becomes a fundamental principle for editorial management. It is not simply a matter of following written rules, but rather of developing skills such as clarity in expressing ideas, impartiality in decision-making, and the initiative to propose policies that maintain trust, ensure objectivity, and promote the sustainability of the process (Fernández Bajón & Guerra González, 2021). Similarly, ethics and impartiality should not remain merely rhetorical; they must be reflected in concrete decisions and fair treatment throughout the entire editorial process (García Romero & Martínez-Guerrero, 2019).

Therefore, having editorial teams and leaders capable of coordinating efficiently, communicating effectively, and maintaining resilience in the face of unforeseen events streamlines processes and improves the experience of those submitting their research. This positive experience becomes a key element that links soft skills with the prestige and reach of scientific journals, paving the way for their strategic positioning.

1.2. Soft Skills as a Strategic Factor for Journals Positioning

The study by Varela-Briceño (2023), focused on the training needs of editorial staff, highlights the value of skills such as communication, leadership, continuous professional development, and teamwork for coordinating the various members of an editorial team. It also emphasizes attitudes such as respect, punctuality, self-control, conflict resolution skills, and a strong professional ethic—all essential for efficient editorial management.

Keeling Álvarez and Alfonso Manzanet (2024) propose understanding editorial management as a formative process. From their perspective, editors must master technical aspects and cultivate skills such as empathy and the ability to support authors, reviewers, and colleagues throughout the editorial process. These interpersonal skills allow for managing tensions and foster collective learning, contributing to an environment based on respect and collaboration. They also add that personal motivation and vocation play a decisive role in the current editorial model. These contributions coincide with those of Hernández García de Velazco and Chumaceiro Hernández (2025), who maintain that strengthening the training of both editors and reviewers represents a strategic opportunity. In their opinion, having a commitment to service and a commitment to contributing to scientific development is important for consolidating solid and reliable academic journals. All of this underscores the need to incorporate these competencies into the training of editorial teams, with a view to improving the quality and positioning of publications.

Based on the previously reviewed literature, the main variable of the study, soft skills, is organized into four dimensions in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Dimensions of Soft Skills in Editorial Management

Dimension	Specific Skill	Description	Author's Perception
Communication	Clarity and precision	Knowing how to communicate what you want to say in a clearly, organized way and with a good foundation.	The editorial team's answers are easily understood.
	Speed and opportunity	Responding promptly and keeping the author informed about the progress of their manuscript.	The author feels his/her time is respected and that the process generates less uncertainty.
Empathy	Active listening	Paying real attention to their doubts, comments, and concerns.	The author feels heard and understood throughout the editorial process.
	Human support	Being available to guide and advise the author at each stage of the process.	The author feels that he/she receives support that goes beyond the technical aspects.
Fairness	Respectful treatment	Using professional and considerate language, even when making observations or communicating rejections.	The author feels that he/she is treated with respect and professionalism.
	Impartiality in decisions	Making decisions based on clear, fair, and well-explained criteria.	Trust that the editorial process is transparent and fair.
Resilience	Contingency Management	Adapting and reorganizing schedules and tasks when delays or problems arise.	The author feels there is commitment and stability in the management.
	Innovation and learning	Being open to improving, updating, and modernizing editorial practices.	The author perceives that the magazine remains dynamic and constantly evolving.

Source: Elaborated by the authors based on Gilmet (2020); Rozemblum et al. (2015); Rodríguez Yunta and Tejada Artigas (2013); Fernández Bajón and Guerra González (2021); Marcó del Pont-Lalli and Martínez-Navarro (2022); Varela-Briceño (2023); Keeling Álvarez and Alfonso Manzanet (2024); 
and Hernández García de Velazco and Chumaceiro Hernández (2025).

2. OBJECTIVES

This study considers soft skills as the primary variable, focusing on how authors perceive them during their most recent editorial experience. Four dimensions are addressed: communication, empathy, fairness, and resilience, observable in the treatment, responses, and support received. However, other competencies are not included because they are not observable from the author's perspective. Based on this, the study aims to analyze, from the authors' perspective, the level of soft skills applied by the editorial team during their most recent experience in an editorial process involving the acceptance or rejection of their manuscript, and to explore its relationship with the indexing level of the corresponding journal.

3. METHODOLOGY

The research adopted a quantitative approach, with a descriptive, correlational, and cross-sectional design. The data collection instrument was an online survey, developed using Microsoft Forms and linked to a university account. It was distributed via email and to academic communities of faculty researchers who had participated in the publication process in scientific journals. Before beginning the questionnaire, an explanation of the study's purpose and an informed consent form were presented, guaranteeing the confidentiality of the responses. Participants were asked to respond based on their most recent completed editorial experience (accepted, rejected, or withdrawn), ensuring only one experience per person. The questionnaire was available between September 2 and September 19, 2025, and a total of 394 responses were collected.

A non-probability convenience sampling method was used. The instrument was structured in two sections: the first with nine descriptive questions to characterize the participants and their editorial experience, and the second consisting of sixteen items distributed across four dimensions of soft skills (Communication, Empathy, Fairness, and Resilience), designed using a five-point Likert scale. All descriptive questions and Likert-type items were mandatory, so no missing values were recorded. Data on areas of expertise or country were not collected, so no comparisons were made in this regard. The instrument's reliability and internal consistency were assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. The detailed coefficients (overall and by dimension) are reported in the Results section. Finally, an open-ended, optional question was included, inviting participants to describe positive aspects or areas for improvement in human interaction during the editorial process (answered by 82 participants).

For the descriptive analysis, composite variables were constructed from the soft skills dimensions included in the questionnaire (Communication, Empathy, Fairness, and Resilience, see Appendix 1). Each dimension consisted of four items on a five-point Likert scale, the values of which were summed to obtain a total score (Norman, 2010). Subsequently, these scores were categorized into five levels (from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”) to facilitate the interpretation of the results. Frequency and percentage tables were created for each dimension, and the overall soft skills score was also calculated, the distribution of which was represented by a histogram with a density curve.

Furthermore, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was applied to examine the association between soft skills and journal indexing levels. This test was considered appropriate given the ordinal nature of the indexing variable and the lack of normality in the distribution of soft skills scores (Hernández et al., 2014). The analysis was performed for both the individual dimensions (Communication, Empathy, Fairness, and Resilience) and the total score, in order to identify the direction and magnitude of the associations.

To determine whether the perception of soft skills varied according to journal indexing, a total variable was constructed that integrated the dimensions of Communication, Empathy, Fairness, and Resilience. This overall score was compared against the categorical variable Journal Indexing Level, coded into seven groups (none, other indexing, Latindex, DOAJ, SciELO, Scopus, and Web of Science). The distribution of the total score was assessed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, which indicated a lack of normality (p <.001). Consequently, the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test was selected to identify differences in the average soft skills scores among the indexing categories.

4. RESULTS

Before the corresponding statistical analyses, the internal consistency of the instrument was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha. The overall soft skills scale obtained α =.974 (N = 394). By dimension, the values were Communication: α =.878, Empathy: α =.944, Fairness: α =.945, and Resilience: α =.945, which supports the reliability of the scales used (Hernández et al., 2014).

The survey was completed by 394 faculty and researchers. In their most recent application process, 85.5% reported acceptance, 13.7% rejection, and less than 1% withdrawal or discontinuation. The duration of their application was concentrated in the 3–6 month (41.4%) and 7–12 month (32.0%) categories, with smaller proportions of <3 months (14.7%) and >12 months (11.9%). Regarding interaction, the most frequent range was 4–6 communications with the editorial team (48.7%), followed by 1–3 (32.0%) and 7–10 (15.5%); only 3.8% indicated more than 10 communications. The main characteristics of the participants and their editorial experience are presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Characteristics of the Sample and the Editorial Process (N = 394)

Variable	n (%)
Being the Corresponding Author in the Last Process
Yes	326 (82.7%)
No	68 (17.3%)
Year of the Last Communication or Editorial Decision
2025	300 (76.1%)
2024	69 (17.5%)
2023	11 (2.8%)
2022 or earlier	14 (3.6%)
Platform Used in the Application Process
OJS	257 (65.2%)
Mail	82 (20.8%)
Other platforms	55 (14.0%)
Payment of Article Processing Charges (APC)
No	307 (77.9%)
Yes	87 (22.1%)
Experience in Scientific Publications
More than 10 articles	249 (63.2%)
5–10 articles	106 (26.9%)
Less than 5 articles	39 (9.9%)
Highest Indexing of the Journal
Scopus	158 (40.1%)
Web of Science	82 (20.8%)
SciELO	70 (17.8%)
Latindex	46 (11.7%)
DOAJ	27 (6.9%)
Other indexing system	8 (2.0%)
None	3 (0.8%)

Source: Elaborated by the authors based on data from the 2025 survey.

Regarding the distribution of perceptions in each dimension of soft skills, most of the faculty-researchers fell under the “I agree” and “I strongly agree” categories, although significant proportions remained in the “I disagree” and “Neutral” categories. Detailed results for each dimension are presented in Table 3. The complete list of items per dimension is included in Annex 1.

Table 3. Distribution of Responses in Four Levels Based on Soft Skills Dimensions (N = 394)

Dimension	I completely disagree n (%)	Disagree n (%)	Neither agree nor disagree n (%)	Agreed n (%)	Strongly agree n (%)
Communication	33 (8.4%)	73 (18.5%)	76 (19.3%)	120 (30.5%)	92 (23.4%)
Empathy	38 (9.6%)	76 (19.3%)	78 (19.8%)	108 (27.4%)	94 (23.9%)
Fairness	32 (8.1%)	59 (15.0%)	53 (13.5%)	133 (33.8%)	117 (29.7%)
Resilience	36 (9.1%)	86 (21.8%)	83 (21.1%)	99  (25.1%)	90 (22.8%)

Note: Elaborated by the authors based on data from the 2025 survey.

When analyzing the total soft skills score, the distribution showed a concentration toward intermediate and high values, suggesting that most faculty and researchers perceive a favorable level in their editorial management experience. Figure 1 presents the histogram with the corresponding density curve.

Figure 1. Distribution of the Total Soft Skills Score in Editorial Management (N = 394)

Source: Elaborated by the authors based on data from the 2025 survey.

Since the sample size exceeded 50 cases (N = 394), the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to assess the normality of the total soft skills score. The result was significant (D = 0.109, p <.001), indicating a non-normal distribution. Consequently, non-parametric tests were chosen. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was used to measure the association between journal indexing level (ordinal variable) and soft skills scores (total and dimensions). The Kruskal-Wallis test was also used to compare soft skills scores across different indexing categories.

4.1. Spearman's Correlation Between Soft Skills and Indexing Level

To examine the relationship between soft skills dimensions and journal indexing levels, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was applied due to the lack of normality in the data. The analysis considered both the four dimensions (Communication, Empathy, Fairness, and Resilience) and the total soft skills score. The results are summarized in Table 4, which shows that all correlations were negative, with magnitudes ranging from very weak to weak. The associations were statistically significant (p < 0.05). The following hypotheses were tested in this section:

• H₀: There is no significant association between soft skills (total and dimensions) and the indexing level of journals.
• H₁: There is a significant and positive association between soft skills (total and dimensions) and the indexing level of journals.

Table 4. Spearman Correlations Between Soft Skills and Indexing Level (N = 394)

Dimension	ρ (Spearman)	p	Interpretation (Hernández et al., 2014).
Communication	-0.103	0.041*	Very weak negative
Empathy	-0.181	<0.001**	Weak negative
Impartiality	-0.114	0.024*	Very weak negative
Resilience	-0.158	0.002**	Weak negative
Soft Skills Total	-0.147	0.003**	Weak negative

Source: * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01. Elaborated by the authors based on data from the 2025 survey.

In the correlation analysis, the null hypothesis (H₀) was rejected, confirming the existence of significant associations between soft skills and indexing level. However, these associations were negative, contrary to the alternative hypothesis (H₁), which proposed a positive relationship. Taken together, these results confirm a consistent pattern: as indexing level increases, perceived soft skills scores in editorial management tend to decrease. To determine whether these differences are statistically significant between specific indexing categories, the Kruskal-Wallis test was applied.

4.2. Kruskal-Wallis Test on Soft Skills and Indexing Level

Given the pattern observed in the previous correlations, the Kruskal-Wallis test was applied to compare the indexing level categories. The following hypotheses were tested in this section:

• H₀: There are no differences in soft skills scores between journal indexing categories.
• H₁: There are differences in soft skills scores between at least two indexing categories.

Figure 2 shows the distribution of soft skills scores according to journal indexing category. Higher medians are observed in Latindex and other indexing systems, and lower medians in Scopus and Web of Science. For this reason, the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the differences between the groups. The Kruskal-Wallis test showed significant differences in soft skills scores according to indexing category, H (6) = 29.73, p <.001. The average ranks were: No indexing system (R = 191.83), Other indexing system (R = 255.63), Latindex (R = 243.51), DOAJ (R = 247.69), SciELO (R = 206.39), Web of Science (R = 150.07), and Scopus (R = 193.37).

The Kruskal-Wallis test rejected the null hypothesis (H₀), confirming that there are statistically significant differences in soft skills scores between indexing categories. This result supports the alternative hypothesis (H₁), demonstrating variations between groups. Furthermore, they propose that the perception of soft skills differs according to the indexing level, with a tendency to be more favorable in lower-ranked journals.

Figure 2. Box-and-Whisker Plot of Soft Skills Scores According to Journal Indexing Category

Source: Elaborated by the authors based on data from the 2025 survey.

The open-ended question invited respondents to identify positive aspects or areas for improvement in human interaction during the editorial process. Among the responses, the need for faster response times and more consistent communication with authors was repeatedly highlighted. Several participants emphasized the importance of empathy, kindness, and respect in their interactions, while others reported experiences of distant or cold interactions. Opportunities for improvement in the quality of feedback were also mentioned, including avoiding unconstructive or biased comments and promoting closer support, especially for researchers in training. These perceptions complement the statistical analyses and confirm that the human dimension is an important component in the overall evaluation of the editorial process.

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Avença et al. (2024) conclude that interpersonal skills such as communication and leadership facilitate knowledge sharing in project environments. Similarly, Al-Nabae et al. (2023) found that training in competencies such as communication, problem-solving, and teamwork is significantly related to employee performance on highly complex projects. Likewise, the results of this research show that when editorial management is viewed as a project, the presence of perceived soft skills, particularly in communication, empathy, and fairness, is associated with a more positive assessment of the editorial experience by authors.

In general, the results suggest that authors report a more humane and empathetic approach in journals with lower indexing levels, while in highly indexed journals, a focus on standardization and formality is perceived, which reduces the perceived value of soft skills in editorial management. In this vein, Hollister et al. (2023) conclude that, although authors more frequently report positive editorial practices, they also mention areas for improvement related to the treatment of authors and the support provided by editors during the publication process. To address these areas, they propose an ethics of care as a framework to guide editorial work, which implies integrating communication and empathy as fundamental principles in interactions with authors. This is relevant when interpreting the results of this study, where the perception of a more personal approach is associated with journals of lower prestige.

Nguyen et al. (2020) show that early-career researchers value the simplicity of submission procedures and the editors' ability to respond promptly to their inquiries in a "good journal," while mid-career researchers prioritize impact indicators and ranking positions. This difference is consistent with the results obtained: in highly indexed journals where reputational and metric criteria predominate, authors tend to perceive less emphasis on soft skills, in contrast to less indexed journals, where interaction is described as closer and more accessible.

Xie et al. (2019) argue that a journal's reputation is linked to the academic capital of its editorial team, which can foster structures that prioritize prestige metrics such as indexing, impact factor, and rankings over author support and attention. In this context, the absence of indicators that assess human interaction and the quality of feedback can lead to technically efficient editorial processes that are perceived as lacking empathy and distant. However, it is important to add the findings of Zhang et al. (2012), who point out that perceptions of quality and editorial support depend on the decision-making experience (acceptance vs. rejection). This suggests that future analyses should consider the effect of lower acceptance rates in highly indexed journals on the composition of author experiences and, consequently, on the overall perception of soft skills.

This study provides empirical evidence on a phenomenon that has been little studied in the literature: while indexing strengthens the legitimacy and prestige of scientific journals, this may be associated with a lower perception of soft skills in editorial interaction. This inference suggests that technical excellence and relational quality do not necessarily advance in parallel, highlighting the need to rethink editorial management as a process that integrates impact metrics with indicators of human interaction and support. Integrating these skills is essential given that editorial interaction involves relationships between people, and a cold or distant approach can be particularly demotivating for researchers in training, limiting their interest in continuing in scientific activity.

From a methodological standpoint, the results suggest that the study of editorial management should incorporate traditionally neglected dimensions, such as empathy, communication, and perceived fairness, into the analysis of journal quality. In this regard, one approach to updating the state of the art involves developing instruments that combine the evaluation of editorial performance with the assessment of interpersonal skills, moving toward more inclusive models of editorial governance. It is essential to recognize that prospective authors are a cornerstone of a scientific journal's future; nurturing their experience throughout all or some stages of the editorial process fosters their trust and loyalty, and can transform them into ambassadors capable of attracting new authors, promoting internationalization, and enhancing the journal's standing.

The study's limitations, such as its focus on faculty researchers (authors) and its reliance on subjective perceptions, suggest expanding the analysis to include other profiles involved in editorial management, such as reviewers and editors, as well as integrating qualitative techniques that directly analyze editorial interactions. The results did not address specific areas of knowledge or countries, which limits their generalizability. Based on this, future research could explore disciplinary differences, compare journals by language, or examine how acceptance rates influence perceptions of interpersonal treatment. These approaches will enrich our understanding of soft skills in the publishing field and contribute to building a more inclusive evaluative framework for scientific publications.

6. REFERENCES

Aguado-López, E., & Becerril-García, A. (2021). El tiempo de la revisión por pares: ¿Obstáculo a la comunicación científica? Interciencia, 46(2), 56-64. https://bit.ly/3JavuOq

Avença, I., Domingues, L., & Carvalho, H. (2024). Do the project manager's soft skills foster knowledge sharing? Project Leadership and Society, 5, 100139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plas.2024.100139

Al-Nabae, M., Nordin, N., Sammani, D., Mudhsh, M. M., Hassan, A. S. A., Maaodhah, A. S., …, & Al-Hosaini, F. F. (2023). Impact of project management soft skills training on employee performance in the oil and gas projects in Yemen. In International Conference on Business and Technology (pp. 206–218). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53998-5_18

Cueva Estrada, J., Sumba Nacipucha, N., Paredes Floril, P., Sanchez-Bayón, A., & Carbo Guerrero, K. (2023). Correlación entre Facebook y Google Scholar en el impacto de revistas científicas. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 81, 314-331. https://doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2023-1897

Cueva Estrada, J. M., & Sánchez-Bayón, A. (2024). Estudio bibliométrico de Economía Digital y sus tendencias. Revista de Estudios Empresariales. Segunda Época, 1, 195-209. https://doi.org/10.17561/ree.n1.2024.8229

Díaz-Duarte, A., Purón-Cid, G., & Rivera-Martínez, M. E. (2025). El papel de las TIC, intraemprendimiento y redes de gestión colaborativa en la innovación y la competitividad empresarial. Retos. Revista de Ciencias de la Administración y Economía, 15(29), 65-85. https://doi.org/10.17163/ret.n29.2025.04

Fernández Bajón, M. T., & Guerra González, J. T. (2021). Transparencia editorial en revistas científicas mexicanas de educación: hacia una gestión integral de las políticas editoriales en las publicaciones periódicas científicas. Investigación Bibliotecológica: Archivonomía, Bibliotecología e Información, 35(87), 13-32. https://doi.org/10.22201/iibi.24488321xe.2021.87.58340

Fiorillo, L., & Mehta, V. (2024). Accelerating editorial processes in scientific journals: Leveraging AI for rapid manuscript review. Oral Oncology Reports, 10, 100511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oor.2024.100511

García Romero, M., & Martínez-Guerrero, C. A. (2019). El perfil del editor en la gestión de las revistas científicas venezolanas. Revista Venezolana de Gerencia, 23(1), 311-327. https://doi.org/10.37960/revista.v23i1.24470

Galiano-Coronil, A., & Blanco-Moreno, S. (2024). Satisfacción y retención de empleados: marketing social y felicidad. Retos. Revista de Ciencias de la Administración y Economía, 14(28), 237-259. https://doi.org/10.17163/ret.n28.2024.04

Gilmet Pagés, A. (2020). Participación de bibliotecólogos en la edición científica en Uruguay. Informatio, 25(2), 143-162. https://doi.org/10.35643/Info.25.2.6

De La Hoz Suárez, B. A., De La Hoz Suárez, A. I., & Manjarres Tete, A. E. (2024). Problems of editorial management for scientific publications. Experiences from an economics and finance journal. We Journal Review, 1(1), 9-15. https://doi.org/10.38202/journal11.2

Hernández Pina, F., & Maquilón Sánchez, J. J. (2010). Indicadores de calidad de las revistas científicas y sistema de gestión editorial mediante OJS. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 28(1), 13-29. https://revistas.um.es/rie/article/view/109941

Hernández García de Velazco, J. J., & Chumaceiro Hernández, A. C. (2025). Revistas científicas: Aproximaciones a su gestión y fortalecimiento desde las políticas públicas en América Latina. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 31(1), 182-194. https://doi.org/10.31876/rcs.v31i1.43497

Hernández, R., Fernández, C., & Baptista, M. (2014). Metodología de la investigación. México: Editorial McGraw-Hill. https://apiperiodico.jalisco.gob.mx/api/sites/periodicooficial.jalisco.gob.mx/files/metodologia_de_la_investigacion_-_roberto_hernandez_sampieri.pdf

Hollister, C. V., Hosier, A., & Williams, J. A. (2023). Author perceptions of positive and negative behaviors among library and information science journal editors. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 49(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2023.102707

Jiménez-Hidalgo, S., Giménez-Toledo, E., & Salvador-Bruna, J. (2008). Los sistemas de gestión editorial como medio de mejora de la calidad y la visibilidad de las revistas científicas. Profesional de la Información, 17(3), 281-292. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2008.may.04

Keeling Álvarez, M., & Alfonso Manzanet, J. E. (2024). La gestión editorial de las revistas científicas como componente de la actividad de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación. Revista Información Científica, 103, e4461. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10553448 

Marcó del Pont-Lalli, R., & Martínez-Navarro, R. (2022). Los largos tiempos de las publicaciones académicas incluidas en SciELO México. Revista Interamericana de Bibliotecología, 45(2), e344044. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rib.v45n2e344044

Mendoza-Solis, M., García-Alcaraz, J. L., & Sánchez-Ramírez, C. (2025). Influencia del liderazgo transaccional y transformacional en el desempeño social, ambiental y operativo. Retos Revista de Ciencias de la Administración y Economía, 15(30), 311-326. https://doi.org/10.17163/ret.n30.2025.07 

Mkumbo, J. G., & Mosha, G. E. (2024). Authors’ satisfaction with the publishing procedures of the Uongozi Journal of Management Development Dynamics. Publishing Research Quarterly, 40(2), 169-187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-024-09993-1

Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the "laws" of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice, 15(5), 625-632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y

Nguyen, H. V., Phan, T. T. H., Nguyen, H., Nguyen, N., & Nguyen, M. H. (2020). What is a good journal? Perceptions of Vietnamese early-career and mid-career researchers. Publishing Research Quarterly, 36(2), 296-303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-020-09718-0

Paz Enrique, L. E., & Rodríguez Torres, E. (2025). Indexación en crisis: actitudes contradictorias, poco éticas y cuestionables de las revistas científicas. We Journal Review, 1(2), 45-55. https://doi.org/10.38202/journal12.1

Penna, P., & Franco, S. C. (2024). Ética en la revisión por pares: desafíos y pautas para la gestión editorial. Ciência da Informação, 53(1). https://doi.org/10.18225/ci.inf.v53i1.7495

Raudales-García, E. V., Artigas, W., Barón Velandia, B., Sumba Nacipucha, N., & Cueva Estrada, J. (2024). Procesos editoriales en revistas científicas: Un análisis bibliométrico a partir de artículos en acceso abierto. Biblios. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 87, e008. https://doi.org/10.5195/biblios.2024.1179

Rodríguez Yunta, L., & Tejada Artigas, C. M. (2013). El editor técnico: un perfil necesario para la profesionalización de la edición de revistas científicas en el entorno digital. Anales de Documentación, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.6018/analesdoc.16.2.176391 

Rozemblum, C., Unzurrunzaga, C., Pucacco, C., & Banzato, G. D. (2015). Calidad editorial y calidad científica en los parámetros para inclusión de revistas científicas en bases de datos en acceso abierto y comerciales. Palabra Clave (La Plata), 4(2), 64-80. http://www.palabraclave.fahce.unlp.edu.ar/article/view/PCv4n2a01

Salas Zendejo, D., & Suárez Escalona, R. (2025). Análisis del cumplimiento de mejores prácticas y transparencia para revistas de acceso abierto diamante [Analysis of best practices compliance and transparency for diamond open access journals]. Revista de Comunicación de la SEECI, 58, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.15198/seeci.2025.58.e903

Segarra-Saavedra, J., Hidalgo-Marí, T., & Tur-Viñes, V. (2023). Editorial time management: peer review dates and other key dates of Spanish Communication journals. Learned Publishing, 36(4), 533-542. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1569

Soler-Sanchis, A., Gil-Saura, I., & Berenguer-Contri, G. (2025). Relación entre comunicación interna, responsabilidad social corporativa y bienestar laboral en empresas de servicios. Retos Revista de Ciencias de la Administración y Economía, 15(29), 165-179. https://doi.org/10.17163/ret.n29.2025.10 

Sumba Nacipucha, N., Sánchez-Bayón, A., Cueva Estrada, J., & Valencia-Arias, A. (2024). Social networks as a strategy to improve the visibility of scientific journals. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2024.2306715

Varela-Briceño, M. (2023). Necesidades de formación de las personas editoras de la Universidad de Costa Rica. E-Ciencias de la Información, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.15517/eci.v13i1.52520

Xie, Y., Wu, Q., & Li, X. (2019). Editorial team scholarly index (ETSI): An alternative indicator for evaluating academic journal reputation. Scientometrics, 120(3), 1333-1349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03177-x

Zhang, Z., Zhang, Z., & Law, R. (2012). The impact of submission experiences on perceptions of journal quality and editorial support: The viewpoint of Chinese authors. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 43(2), 220-229. https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.43.2.22

 

AUTHORS' CONTRIBUTIONS, FUNDING AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Authors' Contributions

Conceptualization, Software, Validation, Formal Analysis, Data Curation, Drafting-Preparation of the original draft, Drafting-Revision and Editing, Visualization, Supervision and Project management: Jorge Manuel Cueva Estrada. Conceptualization, Software, Formal Analysis, Data Curation, Drafting-Revision and Editing, and Visualization: Nicolás Armando Sumba-Nacipucha. Validation, Supervision, Revision and Editing, and Methodological Support: Jorge Luis García Alcaraz. Validation, Supervision, Revision and Editing, and Methodological Support: Rafael Ravina Ripoll. All authors have read and accepted the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research received funding from the Salesian Polytechnic University of Ecuador.

Acknowledgments: This article is part of the research project “Alternative Economic Models for Transformative Growth with Sustainability and Workplace Well-being,” approved by Resolution No. 047-003-2025-05-22 and carried out by the Socio-Economic and Business Research Group (GISEE) at the Salesian Polytechnic University of Ecuador. The research for this article was conducted between June 1 and September 30, 2025.

Authors:

Jorge Manuel Cueva Estrada

Salesian Polytechnic University.

Doctoral candidate in Social and Legal Sciences at Rey Juan Carlos University (Spain); Master’s degree in Business Administration from the Salesian Polytechnic University (Ecuador); Bachelor’s degree in Information Systems from the State University of Guayaquil (Ecuador). Professor at the Salesian Polytechnic University; Editor-in-Chief of the journal *Retos* (Ecuador); and member of the Socio-Economic and Business Research Group (GISEE) and the Educational Innovation Group for the Improvement of Classroom Practices (GIE-MPA) at the Salesian Polytechnic University (Ecuador).

jcueva@ups.edu.ec

Index H: 20 (at the time of publication of this article).

Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3055-1060 

Scopus ID: https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=57224126405 

Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Gco2qwYAAAAJ&hl=es 

ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jorge-Cueva-Estrada 

 

Nicolás Armando Sumba-Nacipucha

Salesian Polytechnic University.

Doctoral student in Social and Legal Sciences at Rey Juan Carlos University (Spain). Master’s degree in Business Administration from the Salesian Polytechnic University (Ecuador). Professor at the Salesian Polytechnic University; Associate Editor-in-Chief of the journal Retos (Ecuador); and member of the Socio-Economic and Business Research Group (GISEE) and the Educational Innovation Group for the Improvement of Classroom Practices (GIE-MPA) at the Salesian Polytechnic University (Ecuador).

nsumba@ups.edu.ec

Index H: 19 (at the time of publication of this article).

Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7163-4252

Scopus ID: https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=57220805995 

Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=apvI7zcAAAAJ&hl=es&oi=ao  

ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nicolas-Sumba 

Academia.edu: https://independent.academia.edu/NicolasSumba 

 

Jorge Luis García Alcaraz

Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez.

Full-time professor in the Department of Industrial Engineering at the Autonomous University of Ciudad Juárez. He holds a Doctorate in Industrial Engineering Sciences, a Doctorate in Innovation in Product Engineering and Industrial Processes, a Doctorate in Industrial Engineering and Technologies, a Doctorate in Mechanical Engineering, and a Doctorate in Information Engineering and Technologies, with postdoctoral research in Manufacturing Processes. His research areas include multi-criteria decision making, production process modeling, environmental impact analysis, supply chain management, and sustainability.  He is currently a Level III National Researcher recognized by Mexico’s SECIHTI.  Dr. García is the author or co-author of 255 papers indexed in Scopus and has authored or edited 19 books published by Springer, CRC Publishing, and others.

jorge.garcia@uacj.mx

Index H: 45 (at the time of publication of this article).

Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7092-6963 

Scopus ID: https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=55616966800 

Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=es&user=Wjz8xeYAAAAJ

ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jorge-Garcia-Alcaraz?ev=hdr_xprf 

Academia.edu: https://uacj.academia.edu/JorgeLuisGarciaAlcaraz 

 

Rafael Ravina Ripoll

University of Cadiz.

Rafael Ravina-Ripoll holds a doctoral degree in history, which he earned in 2015. He is an associate professor of business organization at the University of Cádiz (Spain). He is a member of the “Labor Sciences” Research Group and of INDESS (University Institute for Sustainable Social Development at the University of Cádiz). He has been a visiting professor at the University of Westminster, Business and Law Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences, and the University of Verona, where he has given lectures on happiness management. His primary areas of research are happiness and happiness management. He is the author of more than 100 research articles published in various academic journals indexed in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS), as well as numerous chapters published by leading publishers in the SPI. His research has been cited more than 664 times in WoS, and his h-index is 19 in Scopus. He has reviewed more than 260 articles, as reflected on the Web of Science platform. In addition, he has served as a guest editor for journals indexed in Scopus and Web of Science on happiness management. He is a member of the editorial board of Healthcare Analytics and Revista Jurídicas CUC. He is currently the director of the International University Network of Happiness.

rafael.ravina@uca.es

Index H: 30 (at the time of publication of this article).

Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7007-3123 

Scopus ID: https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=57204642774

Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=oZdJ4rgAAAAJ&hl=es

ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ravina-Ripoll-2 

Academia.edu: https://independent.academia.edu/RafaRavina