- CaseCase Closed
Dispute arising from peer review of a rejected comment and published correction
In 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
Reviewer requesting addition of multiple citations of their own work
A handling editor noticed a reviewer report where the reviewer instructed the author to cite multiple publications by the same reviewer in their manuscript. The handling editor noted a similar instance involving this reviewer from the past and requested the editorial office to look into his reviewing history. This uncovered a concerning pattern of behaviour where the reviewer habitually asked a… - CaseCase Closed
Peer reviewer contacted by author
In a single anonymous 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 man… - Translated resources
Revisión por pares orientatión de COPE
… Guías éticas para Revisores Pares Cómo reconocer la potencial manipulación del proceso de revisión por pares Qué considerar al ser invitado a hacer una revisión por pares de un manuscrito Revisión por pares orientatión de COPE - Seminars and webinars
COPE Podcast 2018: Diversity and Inclusivity in Peer Review
Diversity and inclusivity in peer review. Podcast with Professor Andy Hor, Hong Kong University A discussion in 2018 with Charon Pierson, COPE Secretary and Andy Hor, Vice President of Research at Hong Kong University. An institutional perspective on training early career researchers within a culture of diversity and inclusivity. - Translated resources
Cómo reconocer la potencial manipulación del proceso de revisión por pares
…Cómo reconocer la potencial manipulación del proceso de revisión por pares Los pares revisores pueden ser sugeridos por: El editor que gestiona el manuscrito. Autores al momento de presentar su manuscrito a la revista. Otro revisor quien no puede hacer la revisión por pares del manuscrito. Mientras existe la expectativa de que todos los invo… - Translated resources
Qué considerar al ser invitado a hacer una revisión por pares de un manuscrito
Qué considerar al ser invitado a hacer una revisión por pares de un manuscrito For the latest version (English language) of this guidance visit https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.17 Related resources - Translated resources
Guías éticas para revisores pares
…Una Introducción Los revisores pares juegan un papel en asegurar la integridad del registro académico. El proceso de revisión por pares depende en gran medida en la confianza y disposición a participar de la comunidad académica y requiere que todos los involucrados se comporten de modo responsable y ético. Los revisores pares juegan un papel central y crítico en el proceso de revisión… - Seminars and webinars
Australian Seminar 2018: Levers for transparency: from funding through research to publication
…At the COPE Australian Seminar 2018, Professor Ralph Horne, Deputy Pro Vice Chancellor for research and innovation at RMIT, presented on transparent institutions and the risks, challenges and opportunities that arise for institutions striving for transparency. Deborah Wyatt, the Vice President for society research publishing at Wiley, presented her principles for transparency in an evol… - CaseCase Closed
Editor and reviewers requiring authors to cite their own work
A 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… - Discussion documents
Who 'owns' peer reviews? September 2017
This COPE discussion document introduces issues and guidance around the ownership of peer reviews. Questions discussed include: who has ownership of peer review comments; who gets to determine whether a review can be made public, and if so, which parties would be required to consent to its publication. The document also covers whether the sharing of reviewer comments breaches the confidentialit… - Seminars and webinars
COPE webinar 2017: Current issues in peer review
For Peer Review Week 2017, COPE held a Webinar on the current issues in Peer Review, moderated by Heather Tierney, Managing Editor of Journals and Ethics Policy at the American Chemical Society, and COPE Council Member. The guest speakers were: Tony Ross-Hellauer, Scientific Manager at the OPENAire2020 project, University of Göttinge; Jessica Polka, Director of ASAPbio… - Research
An analysis of peer review cases brought to COPE from 1997-2016
[PDF, 100Kb - click image to download] … - Seminars and webinars
China Seminar 2017: Peer review: strengths, limitations and emerging issues
…Download presentation: "Peer review: strengths, limitations and emerging issues [PDF… - Seminars and webinars
China Seminar 2017: Peer review in the journals published by Chinese Medical Association, experiences and challenges
…Download presentation: Peer review in the journals published by Chinese Medical Association: experiences and challenges [PDF, 451KB]… - CaseCase Closed
Lead author of a research paper disagrees with content of a linked editorial
The author of an accepted research paper (that showed some benefits for a controversial treatment) contacted the journal shortly prior to publication of the paper. It is the policy of our journal not to share commissioned editorials with authors ahead of time. This author had, however, received a copy of the journal press release in preparation for a press briefing. The press release quoted sta… - CaseOn-going
Editor found guilty of research misconduct
A journal appointed a new editor-in-chief to their journal. He had previously been on the editorial board of the journal for 10 years and the editorial registrar for 5 years. During the handover period, it came to the journal’s attention that he was due to appear in front of a tribunal for research fraud. By agreement with the journal, he stepped down until the outcome of the tribunal, and the… - CaseCase Closed
Is it plagiarism to use text verbatim from a manuscript review?
A commentary was reviewed by journal A and rejected. The paper was then submitted and accepted at journal B. Journal B published the commentary. After publication, a reviewer from journal A wrote to journal B with a complaint of plagiarism. Text from his/her review was used in the commentary published in journal B Question(s) for the COPE Forum• How should the editor of jo… - CaseCase Closed
Case histories and post publication debate
A letter to the editor from reader A was received by our journal concerning a published case history from author B. Reader A questioned the choice of treatment and author B's conclusion regarding the reason why the patient died. We believe this case raises at least two interesting questions. Firstly, the patient, or in this case the patient's relatives, could possibly suffer an addition… - Seminars and webinars
North American Seminar 2016: Can you spot a fake? The trends of fake peer reviews
…Download presentation: Can you spot a fake? The trend of fake peer reviews [PDF, 848KB] …