Dr X claimed to have found fabrication and falsification of data in an article submitted for publication by Dr Y. Dr Y’s university investigated and found no evidence of fraud but a genuine error in the figure. Dr X provided more information and a further investigation was initiated. It again dismissed the complaint as unfounded. The paper was then published. Dr X is now asking the journal for a retraction on the basis that the university investigation did not support their charges against Dr Y.
An exposé reported by Professor Z re-stated the claim of fraud and was forwarded to the journal. The journal contacted Professor Z (head of department). Professor Z replied with details of the situation and letters of exoneration. The journal discussed the issues and agreed no action was needed
Two years later Professor Z again contacted the journal saying it was unethical to recruit patients while the previous investigation was ongoing. The journal referred the issue back saying that was an issue that should be taken up with the university.
The journal later received an email from Professor Z complaining the university had dismissed their claims and saying: 'I believe the [University] is not acting responsibly, and that [journal] should retract this paper'.
The journal believes this is not their responsibility but Professor Z is unlikely to be satisfied.
Question for COPE Council
- What more can the journal do?
Advice on this case is from a small number of COPE Council Members. Most cases on the COPE website are presented to the COPE Forum where advice is offered by a wider group of COPE Members and COPE Council Members. Advice on individual cases is not formal COPE guidance.
It seems the journal has done all it can reasonably do. The university has investigated several times which is also reasonable. Unless further evidence comes to light, the journal should state that the case is closed, and no further correspondence will be entered into. Professor Z cannot order the journal to retract this paper (they are not a party to the publishing contract). If they find further evidence, then they should take the matter up with the university. Similarly, if Professor Z is concerned there may be a suspected cover up by the university, then they should again pursue the matter with the university, using whatever processes are available within that university.
So, given the outcome of the university investigation, the journal has no choice but to refuse to retract the article until and unless new evidence emerges that there is a university cover up of the situation. Even if this is what is happening here, the journal and the publisher cannot interfere in a university investigation.
COPE Council judged in 2022 that ‘A journal has the right to retract an article, even when an institutional investigation does not find misconduct. The editor is responsible for the ethical standards of their journal, and if the editor has independent evidence that warrants correction or retraction, it is appropriate for the editor to express concern and retract, regardless of the findings of the institutional investigation. While an institutional investigation should not be "ignored", the recommendation from an institution is just that—a recommendation. Unfortunately, some institutional investigations are conflicted or inadequate. The journal cannot assess the adequacy of the institutional investigation because each university has different standards for investigations of misconduct and so the editor cannot verify how rigorous the investigation was. A statement along with the retraction can explain that there were additional concerns not addressed by the results of the investigation.’