- Flowcharts
What to do if you suspect image manipulation in a published article
COPE's guidance in the form of a flowchart on what to do if you suspect that images in a published article have been manipulated.… - Flowcharts
Systematic manipulation of the publication process
Manipulation of the publication process is a relatively new form of misconduct affecting the publishing industry. These guidelines represent an important first step towards encouraging openness and collaboration between publishers to address this phenomenon. Systematic manipulation of the publication process is where an individual or a group of individuals have repeatedly used dis… - Flowcharts
General approach to publication ethics for the Editorial Office
A guide detailing the suggested approach to the organisation of the Editorial Office in order to comply with COPE’s Core Practices. COPE has many resources to assist publishers and editors in making decisions about ethical issues in publication, including guidelines, - Flowcharts
English: all flowcharts
For ease of use, we have gathered together here all of COPE's flowcharts into one downloadable PDF file (18 pages): What to do if you suspect redundant (duplicate) publication (2 flowcharts) What to do if you suspect plagiarism (2 flowcharts) What to do if you suspect fabricated data (2 flowcharts) Changes in authorship (4 flowcharts) What to do i… - Flowcharts
What to do if you suspect an ethical problem
COPE's guidance, as a flowchart, on what to do if you suspect an ethical problem with a submitted manuscript. - Guidelines
Guidelines for managing the relationships between society-owned journals, their society, and publishers
The journals of ‘Learned Societies’ and ‘Professional Associations’ are an important part of the scientific literature. Regardless of the publication arrangements (i.e., self-published by the society, published under contract with a professional publishing house, or some combination of both) and the number of journals affiliated with that society, the policies of and the relationships among the… - Guidelines
Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
Introduction The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) are scholarly o… - Guidelines
Guidelines for the Board of Directors of Learned Society Journals
The journals of Learned Societies are an important part of the scientific literature. Their management should be of the highest quality and ethically sound. First, the relationship of Editors of the journals of Learned Societies to those Societies is often complex. However, notwithstanding the economic and political realities of their journals, directors of Learned Societies should respe… - Guidelines
Guidance for Editors: research, audit and service evaluations
Regulations regarding what type of study requires ethical approval vary worldwide. In some countries all studies require ethical approval but in others not. This may lead to submission to journals of manuscripts relating to such studies that do not satisfy the journal’s normal requirement for independent ethical approval, and rejection of the manuscript because of misunderstanding of local regu… - Guidelines
A Short Guide to Ethical Editing for New Editors
Background/structure Becoming an editor of a journal is an exciting but daunting task especially if you are working alone without day to day contact with editorial colleagues. This short guide aims to summarise key issues and to provide links to relevant pages of the COPE website as well as those of other organisations. 1. Initial assessment of journal whe… - Discussion documents
COPE Forum 11 February 2019: Diversity and inclusion in research publishing
It is widely recognised that teams and organisations in all sectors of society perform better and make better decisions when they embrace diversity and inclusion in their culture and, particularly, among their leadership. Diversity refers to having a wide range of human differences in the composition of a team. Inclusion, inclusivity, or inclusiveness refers to ensuring that all team members fe… - Case
Possible plagiarism
2019We received an email from a whistleblower notifying us about possible plagiarism in two chapters published by us, both authored by the same two authors. The whistleblower accused the authors of substantial plagiarism. In both chapters there were, indeed, certain unattributed parts of the text, although the majority was properly attributed. Some of the unattributed parts were authored by… - CaseOn-going
Dispute arising from peer review of a rejected comment and published correction
2019In 2016, group A published manuscript X in our journal. In early 2017, group B submitted a comment critical of the published manuscript. Following peer review, in accordance with the journal’s then active policy, the comment was rejected from further consideration. The policy allowed for the author of the original article to be one of the peer reviewers of the comment. The lead author of… - CaseCase Closed
Increased number of casual submissions
2018We have experienced a sudden spurt in casual submissions of poor quality articles. We believe this is because authors wish to show that they have submitted articles which are under consideration at reputable journals. While any journal or editor would be happy to see increased numbers of submissions, sadly, most are of very poor quality in all respects. Most are very casually prepared wi… - Discussion documents
COPE Forum 5 November 2018: Predatory Publishing
Predatory publishing is generally defined as for-profit open access journal publication of scholarly articles without the benefit of peer review by experts in the field or the usual editorial oversight of the journals in question. The journals have no standards and no quality control and frequently publish within a very brief period of time while claiming that articles are peer-reviewed. There… - CaseOn-going
Editor manipulation of impact factor
2018An editor in chief of a major medical journal in a specialty field is also an author. The editor submits a manuscript to a competing journal in the same field. The manuscript receives moderately favourable reviews and the authors are invited to respond to the reviewer input and submit a revised manuscript. In the communication from that journal's editor in chief, the authors are asked to cite a… - Translated Resources
Princípios de Transparência e Boas Práticas em Publicações Acadêmicas
Introdução O Committee on Publication Ethics (Comitê de Ética em Publicações-COPE), o Directory of Open Access Journals (Diretório de Revistas de Acesso Aberto-DOAJ), a Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (Associação de Editores Acadêmicos de Acesso Aberto-OASPA) e a - Translated Resources
Principios de Transparencia y Mejores Prácticas en Publicaciones Académicas
Introducción El Committee on Publication Ethics (Comité de Ética para Publicaciones (COPE)), el Directory of Open Access Journals (Directorio de Revistas de Acceso Abierto (DOAJ)), la Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (Asociación de Editores Académicos de Acceso Abierto (OASPA)) y la - Discussion documents
COPE Forum 30 April 2018: Preprints: continuing the conversation
Preprint platforms have been common in physics and mathematics but the preprint landscape is changing rapidly with new platforms emerging across various disciplines. This raises opportunities for discussion across communities and for all those involved: preprint platforms, journals, authors, funders and institutions. COPE has facilitated this discussion previously via an earlier forum di… - CaseCase Closed
Editor and reviewers requiring authors to cite their own work
2018A staff member in our editorial office noticed a decision letter where a handling editor instructed an author to cite an article published by the handling editor. The staff member wondered if this had happened before and reviewed recent decision letters by that editor. This revealed a concerning pattern of behaviour—the handling editor’s decision letters (including reviewers’ comments) asked au…