A journal received a request from University A for a published paper to be retracted, citing ethical issues with the grant application submitted by an author from University B. The journal is satisfied that the rigorous editorial processes required by the journal were followed prior to publication and asked for specific details of the ethical breach; evidence that all authors on the publication had been advised of the request for retraction; and the results of the institutional investigation into the matter.
A conversation between the journal and Author 1 revealed that Author 1 (from University A) had sent Author 2 (from University B) a copy of their grant application. Author 2 copy and pasted sections of the application to secure a similar, yet separate grant. While the specific details of each grant application are unique, University A claims that text used to describe the objectives, project process and management, participants and target groups, and outcomes is identical. Author 1 is listed on both grant applications and is a coauthor on the manuscript under investigation. University A has since returned the grant funding secured by Author 1 related to the second grant (secured by Author 2). The project funding is not directly related to the topic/content of the manuscript in question, rather it appears to be salary support for Author 2.
The journal considers this an issue between University A and Author 2, and feels University A should contact University B so they can investigate and advise the journal of the outcome of that investigation. The journal does not consider that the issue has any effect on the results of the published manuscript, and it is not at risk of endangering anyone utilising the results, negating the need for urgent retraction by the journal. The journal is also concerned about retracting an article that has multiple authors from multiple international institutions.
Questions for the Forum
-
What is the correct process to follow in this case?
-
Are there other steps the journal should take in this matter?
-
Are there additional safeguards that could be implemented?
The presenter of the case further clarified that it is unclear whether either the funder or the university’s research office is carrying out any adjudication of potential unethical behaviour.
Forum members agreed that this is not a journal issue. The editors are correct to act in the way that they have done, and should pass the matter on to the institutions for proper investigation. If the institutions subsequently have recommendations for action on the article (for example, if it is found that the research was conducted improperly) then they can communicate this to the journal, although the journal is not obliged to follow their recommendation if they feel that the concerns did not affect the content of the article. If the institution’s findings do have a direct bearing on the article then the editors could consider a retraction or a correction. The editors might also want to consider notifying the funding organisation of the situation in case they want to investigate further.
We have responded following the advice of the committee to the group making the query. We have heard nothing further in this regard and consider the case closed.