An article published in a journal in 2023 appears to have been plagiarised in a possible predatory journal but the publishers are unable to get a response from the predatory journal or affiliated Institute.
The article (Article A) was submitted to Journal X in 2022 and published early in 2023. The authors reached out to the Journal after finding that another article dated from 2021 (Article B), in a different journal (Journal Y) and with different authors was extensively plagiarised from Article A (54% similarity score by iThenticate and all figures from Article A are identical in Article B). Journal Y has signs of being a predatory journal: it is not covered by SCOPUS; the article has a non-operational DOI; it features citations from 2022 and 2023 despite allegedly being 'published' in 2021; it is only available as a pdf; and no data and supporting evidence is available. Furthermore, Journal Y does not provide a publication date, submission date, peer-review process, acceptance date, etc. that can be used to track or verify the 2021 publication information for Article B.
The authors of Article B appear to have additionally created at least 3 suspected fake self-citations in the reference section. These particular references are either published in a known predatory journal or provide additional evidence that the authors of Article B are repeat offenders. During investigation Journal X identified that one of these references has plagiarised extensively (6 out of 7 figures) from another journal Z by a different publisher. In good faith Journal X shared this information with Journal Z as well so they can investigate further.
In line with the policy and procedures of Journal X and following COPE guidelines repeated efforts were made to contact the editors of Journal Y and the institute of authors of Article B. However, no response has been received and no clarification has been provided. No contact information for authors of Article B is available to communicate with them and seek any clarification.
Question for the Forum:
- Are there actions Journal X can take if the article that plagiarised and was published in the likely predatory journal is never retracted.
The presenter of the case informed the Forum that they have found another paper by the same authors which plagiarises 7 out of 7 figures. They are therefore concerned that this may represent a trend by these authors. It is possible that this involves deliberate collaboration with predatory journals, either plagiarising directly from other articles, or using them as templates and changing key terms.
The Forum agreed that the most important outcome is that readers are made aware of the duplication, since it will be difficult if not impossible to secure a retraction. This could take the form of a neutrally worded editorial note, informing readers that there is another version of the article available that is not from the current authors, and which should not be cited or counted in systematic reviews. Since the article is in the public domain it is permissible to provide the full citation, including the name of the journal. This could also have an educative function if there is a risk that the predatory journal is using a web bot which is targeting many authors from the same journal. The editors could also consider making a comment on a site like PubPeer, though this is unlikely to have much impact on the predatory journal, which is clearly not concerned with behaving ethically.
If the predatory journal is not indexed in the major databases such as SCOPUS and Medline it is unlikely to be easy to discover by readers, and so the current editors can hope that it will not receive undue attention. However, they should be mindful that it is still part of the published record when considering their actions and how to warn readers.
The publisher has requested its legal team to reach out to the other journal seeking clarification and a response from them before taking any further action. They are considering that publishing a note on an article post publication for such type of situations might set a precedent and therefore want to be mindful of potential implications.