What should a reviewer do if they have a non-financial conflict of interest?

When a reviewer encounters a non-financial conflict of interest, the most responsible course of action is to inform the editor and continue with the review process. By disclosing the conflict, the reviewer demonstrates transparency and integrity, which are crucial in maintaining the credibility of the peer review system. This not only allows the editor to assess the situation but also ensures that the integrity of the review process is upheld.

Adhering to this protocol helps in managing potential biases that may arise from the conflict, thereby contributing to a more objective evaluation of the manuscript. The transparency also reassures authors and readers that the evaluation of their work has been conducted fairly and without undue influence.

The other options do not uphold the standards of ethical conduct expected in scholarly publishing. Not disclosing a conflict undermines the integrity of the review process, while taking no action also fails to address the ethical implications of a conflict. Withdrawing from the review process might be appropriate in some scenarios, but informing the editor first allows for a more nuanced resolution that could still permit the continuation of the review, if deemed appropriate by the editor.