- CaseOn-going
Authors request withdrawal of a 19-year old article
We have been approached by the authors of an article published about 19 years ago stating that they have found an error in a mathematical proof in their research. As a result, although the main theorem proposed in the paper should still be true, they would need to completely revise the text and intend in the longer run to find a new proof. They recognise that the paper as published cannot stand… - CaseOn-going
Plagiarism by a possible predatory journal
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 (Art… - CaseCase Closed
Request for retraction due to alleged ethical misconduct in a grant application
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… - CaseCase Closed
Ethical issues of responding to government agency request for information
A journal published several articles, reviewed by reviewers recommended by the author, that were identified as suspect. After a thorough investigation, the journal determined that almost all of the peer review responses for these articles were fabricated - the result of identity misappropriation and fraud. The journal was subsequently contacted by two government agencies of the country… - CaseCase Closed
Enquiry regarding copyright/retractions
A journal received a paper that had previously been retracted from another publisher’s journal as a result of malpractice in the peer review process (a result of reviewer/editor misconduct rather than actions on the part of the authors). Having reviewed various sources of guidance, it would appear that there is some precedent for re-publication of retracted papers (suitably corrected or… - CaseCase Closed
Image manipulation case
A journal was contacted by a non-anonymous whistleblower pointing out problems with two figures in a published paper. The journal wrote to the authors, who provided them with films for the gels and an explanation and additional figure data for the histology image, where a mistake was made when assembling the images. The journal published an erratum and informed the whistleblower. Subsequ… - CaseCase Closed
Publication of an article accepted 5 years ago
Several years ago a previous editor of a journal accepted an article for publication following peer review. The current editor feels that the article should not have been accepted in the first instance, but rejected instead. After acceptance, the article was sent to a copy editor who was scheduled to work on it. However, the process was stopped by the previous editor and the copy editor. The la… - CaseCase Closed
Should a journal disclose peer reviewer names?
A journal received a manuscript in July concerning the conditions surrounding the ending of an individual’s contract of employment. Following peer review and revision, the manuscript was accepted and published in October of the same year. Two years later, the journal received a letter from a lawyer representing a client who was suing the former employer discussed in the article. The author of t… - CaseCase Closed
Author refuses to comply with editorial review prior to production and publication
The Editor-in-Chief of a journal received a message from a corresponding author of a brief communication, stating that the proposed editorial edits were beyond typical formatting edits at this stage. They felt said many edits were not appropriate, would need further response and suggested holding this article (which had already been in process with the journal for over a year) for the next edit… - CaseCase Closed
Author withdraws manuscript upon payment request
We occasionally come across a situation when an author withdraws a manuscript upon receiving a payment request. We consider this irresponsible, when much of the publication process has been completed by editors and reviewers. We request authors to provide payment details after the manuscript has been accepted for publication. The fees policy is published on our website and we require that the a… - CaseCase Closed
Misrepresentation of journal decision on social media
An author submitted an invited paper to a journal and, after a double anonymous peer review, the decision on the paper was to request ‘major revision’. The author decided not to revise the paper, and therefore effectively withdrew the paper, based on disagreements with the reviewers. These disagreements were not discussed with the editor prior to withdrawing the paper. The editor replied to the… - CaseCase Closed
Wrong version of article published. Should we retract?
The incorrect PDF version of an article was published together with the correct HTML, XML and EPUB versions. The variations between the PDF and other versions are language editing related, and do not affect the scientific value or scientific nature of the article. Questions for COPE Council Given that two version of the article exists, should the journal retract th… - CaseCase Closed
Corrigendum or erratum?
The publisher of a journal has found a spelling mistake in a published manuscript (an abbreviation was explained incorrectly in the original published manuscript). Having in mind COPE's guidelines, "The term erratum usually refers to a production error, caused by the journal. The term corrigendum (or correction) usually refers to an author error", is a corrigendum the proper way to correct this… - CaseCase Closed
Plagiarism and copyright of material without permission
The presenters found an e-book where all of the 'chapters' comprised articles from different issues and volumes of their journal. These were used without the journal’s permission or any form of approval. The journal’s co-publisher neither gave permission nor was contacted. Also, no one contacted the authors of the articles involved for permission. The journal is open access with… - CaseCase Closed
Publication of correspondence relating to a paper currently online
A journal published an article discussing alleged partnerships between a well-known soft drinks brand and a number of health organisations in one particular country. The article was fully peer-reviewed prior to acceptance and now sits online in the journal’s advance access section of the website. A month after it appeared online, the Editor-in-Chief started to receive several written calls for… - CaseCase Closed
Using the name of a scientific society inappropriately
A journal published an article about clinical recommendations for a condition that supposedly was the result of a consensus between two scientific societies of different medical specialties. The article underwent peer review and no problems were identified at that stage. However, about one month after publication the journal was contacted by one of the scientific societies raising concerns that… - CaseCase Closed
Retraction notices: Who (if anyone) should be listed as author?
Publisher A has been developing an internal publisher style guide for retraction notices, but has not been able to find any obvious industry best practice when it comes to whether retractions should have an author byline, and if yes, who should be listed. Some retractions have no authors listed; others give 'The Editors of Journal X' as the author byline (in cases of retraction owing to author… - CaseOn-going
Should we retract a published paper with a high similarity match?
The journal published an original article in 2022. Recently, we received feedback from a third party that the paper is similar to the authors' other work published in 2019. The duplicate rate of the initial submission was 31% and the final version was 24% which is within the journal’s standard. The concern was that the paper may not add value as the authors have already published similar resear… - CaseOn-going
Excessive self-citation in a book chapter
The case concerns an introductory chapter in a book. The publisher was first contacted about potential misconduct as part of a broader investigation into an academic who was a coauthor on an introductory chapter in a book. The publisher's subsequent investigation identified excessive self-citation in the work (one of the coauthors is named as an author on 12 out of 16 referenced works).… - CaseCase Closed
Exposing citation manipulation and fraud in the community
A publisher has identified a ring of three individuals who acted as guest editors for three special issues. These individuals used nine fake accounts to peer review manuscripts. For some manuscripts, the fake identities were used alongside legitimate reviewers, while in other cases they were used exclusively. The publisher has also identified several submissions to those special issues where th…