You are here

Guidance

Filter by topic

Filter by resource type

Showing 41–60 of 190 results
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Victim of article theft wants correction to list their name, not retraction

    Author A contacted us claiming that an article published in the journal recently by author B was stolen from an article author A had earlier submitted to two different publishers, publisher A in 2016 and publisher B in 2017. Author A provided the PDFs of the manuscripts they had submitted to those other publishers. The version submitted to us 2018 by author B was very similar to that submitted…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Peer reviewer contacted by author

    In a single blind peer review process, a reviewer gave an author detailed suggestions about improvements in the statistical analysis. The author was asked to revise and resubmit the paper to address these and other reviewers' suggestions. The author, unaware of the reviewer’s identity, subsequently approached the reviewer as a respected colleague at a professional meeting to discuss the manuscr…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Authorship conflict

    Author A contacted our journal following publication of a manuscript claiming that he was the rightful author. We asked the author for proof and he said that he had all of the data concerning the patient because he received the operative specimen and made the diagnosis. Author A said he also collaborated in writing the article with author B and hence was surprised that neither his name nor his…
  • Case
    On-going

    Inconclusive institutional investigation into authorship dispute

    After publication of an article, Author A contacted the journal asking to correct their surname. Author A’s name consists of two parts, but only one was included in the publication. The editor accepted this request but asked all authors to agree to publication of an erratum. Author B (the corresponding author) immediately replied, disagreeing with publication of such an erratum. Author A inform…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Dispute between two authors

    A manuscript was submitted by author A to our journal. The content of the paper was controversial. We sent this manuscript for peer review by two clinical reviewers. We wrote back to author A requesting major revisions to address the concerns and issues raised by the reviewers. A revised paper was submitted and accepted for publication. Because the article was controversial, mini-comment…
  • Case
    On-going

    Stolen article

    At acceptance but before publication, we found article A submitted to journal A was highly similar to article B, published 5 months earlier in conference proceedings in journal B by another publisher. The abstracts were nearly identical, but the author lists and affiliations did not overlap. We asked the authors to explain this and they said article A is their own work, but it was inadvertently…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Authorship issues from disbanded consortium

    A manuscript was submitted to one of our journals in a special issue. The initial submission included 15 authors with 9 affiliations. The authors were part of a consortium which has now been disbanded. The manuscript was provisionally accepted for publication. At this point, three of the authors requested to be removed from the author list, citing irreconcilable differences with the corr…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Withdrawal request by an author

    We received a request by an author who states not to have contributed to an article published in 2015. The author claims that his name was used without his knowledge and that the corresponding author has been retired for several years and can no longer be reached. At the time of submission, we received a copyright transfer signed with the author’s name (we request all authors to sign the form).…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Authorship dispute unsatisfactorily resolved by institution

    The journal was contacted with a claim to first authorship of a paper currently published online ahead of print. Print publication was put on hold pending the result of the investigation. The claim to first authorship was based on the claimant stating that they had obtained most results published in the paper during their PhD studies under the supervision of the corresponding author, and contri…
  • Seminars and webinars

    COPE webinar 2017: Standards in authorship

    COPE's first webinar for information, shared discussion and practical advice on common authorship issues faced by COPE members, was held in June 2017. Guest speakers: Deborah Poff, Editor-in-Ch…
  • Seminars and webinars

    China Seminar 2017: Identifying authorship: how hard can it be?

    …Download presentation: Identifying authorship: how hard can it be? [PDF, 2,109 KB]…
  • Seminars and webinars

    China Seminar 2017: Promoting awareness of good authorship practice

    …Download presentation: Promoting awareness of good authorship practice [PDF, 1,290KB]…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Withdrawing from authorship

    A journal published a paper that is now under investigation by the host institution for misconduct. All authors signed that they agreed authorship and took responsibility for the content of the paper. After the investigations started, an author asked to be removed from authorship. Questions for the COPE Forum• What should the journal do in this situation? • Should th…
  • Translated resources

    ¿Qué constituye una autoría?

    …COPE ¿Qué constituye una autoría? El presente documento apunta a estimular intercambio en relación a los temas más comunes de la autoría enfrentados por miembros de COPE. Trata de las guías existentes en asuntos de autoría, compila algunos principios básicos para ayudar a prevenir problemas comunes y presenta algunos de los temas más complicados que han surgido en intercambios anterior…
  • Discussion documents

    Authorship

    …Authorship discussion document This document, based on the COPE Discussion Document titled What Constitutes Authorship? resulted from a review of the COPE Forum cases related to authorship, comments from COPE members related to the discussion document, and a desire to move past the stage of discussion to providing practical advice on addressing the most common issues around authorship.…
  • Translated resources

    What constitutes authorship? (Chinese)

    …作者身份由什么构成? COPE讨论文件 本文旨在围绕出版伦理委员会(Committee on Publication Ethics,COPE)成员最常面对的作者身份问题 激发讨论。文中探讨了有关作者身份的现有指导方针,总结了一些有助于防止发生常见问题的基本原则, 并且列出了在之前的讨论中提出的一些更棘手的问题,其中许多问题具有学科特定性并需要更细致的考 虑。COPE欢迎针对本文提供反馈,并邀请成员指出来自不同学科的进一步作者身份指南。我们鼓励期 刊编辑和出版机构作出评论(无论是否为COPE成员),同时也欢迎来自研究人员/作者和学术机构的意 见。请将所有评论意见通过电子邮件发送至COPE运营经理Natalie Ridgeway,具体联络方式如下 :http://publ…
  • Case
    On-going

    Authorship dispute regarding author order

    A paper was accepted in 2012 but there was a lengthy disagreement between the four authors regarding the order of authorship. The authors were advised that the paper would not be published unless all authors could sign a written agreement on the order of authorship and copyright form. An agreement was received in 2015 that specified the order of authorship and named one of the authors as…
  • Case
    On-going

    Would the loss of a clinical licence in one country impact on the ability to do clinical work in another?

    The associate editor of journal X identified author Y on a submission paper as someone who had lost their license to practice due to malpractice. As part of the settlement, author Y had agreed to refrain from providing services to patients. Author Y now resides on a different continent, and the study presented in the submission was apparently carried out in in this continent. There is no mentio…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    The role of the lead author

    An author on a "perspective/consensus" type paper continues to provide new editorial as well as substantial content comments on consecutive versions of a paper, and currently disagrees with the content of the final version of the paper. The other eight authors have approved the final version of the paper prepared and circulated by the lead author. At this stage, the lead author sees no rational…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Publication of post-doctoral work

    In 2012, Dr X started her post-doctoral training under a fellowship. She worked on the project until 2014, when the fellowship ended. She did all the work herself, and gave two seminars showing her results and progress, with positive feedback. When needed, she consulted with the supervisor or with a senior scientist in the laboratory (who has since resigned). By the time she finished, she had w…

Pages