You are here

Guidance

Filter by topic

Filter by resource type

Showing 81–100 of 1061 results
  • Seminars and webinars

    Post-publication corrections

    This discussion panel features Elizabeth Moylan (Senior Manager, Research Integrity Strategy & Policy at Wiley), Mark Hooper (Manager, Research Ethics and Integrity at the Queensland University of Technology), and Jennifer Byrne (publication integrity ‘sleuth’ and the University of Sydney), talking about dealing with issues that arise after publication has taken p…
  • Seminars and webinars

    Image manipulation

    In this session, Jana Christopher, Image Data Integrity Analyst at FEBS Press, offers an authoritative overview of current issues and tools in detecting image manipulation. This discussion was part of 'Publication Misconduct and Fraud Day' hosted by COPE during Publication Integrity Week 2023.…
  • Seminars and webinars

    Publication misconduct tools

    In this panel the audience heard from five representatives from organisations which produce tools to detect publication misconduct. Together they showed that while technology is creating new challenges for academic publishing, it can also be part of the solution.  This discussion is one of eleven sessions hosted by COPE during 
  • Seminars and webinars

    Ethical concerns in research on urbanisation: perspectives from the Global South

    In this session Neha Sami -Associate Dean, School of Environment and Sustainability, and Senior Lead, Academics & Research, Indian Institute for Human Settlements- talks about the need to build a collaborative research agenda when carrying out work in the Global South. This discussion is one of eleven sessions hosted by COPE during 
  • Seminars and webinars

    Inclusive language: policing or progressive?

    This session examines the potential benefits and dangers of language use policies.  This discussion is one of eleven sessions hosted by COPE during Publication Integrity Week 2023. "It is extremely powerful has really made me think. Highly recommended for anyone interested in DEI in pu…
  • Seminars and webinars

    Introduction to publication ethics and the COPE ethics toolkit

    In this session, COPE Trustee Trevor Lane and Council Member Siri Lunde Stromme (co-chair of the COPE Membership subcommittee) introduce the basic principles of publication ethics and how to use guidance and tools available to ensure publication ethics is embedded in a journal's day to day practice. This discussion is one of eleven sessions hosted by COPE durin…
  • Seminars and webinars

    Caste and publishing: an ethics gap?

    In this talk, Gaurev Pathania, Assistant Professor of Sociology at the Center for Justice and Peacebuilding (Eastern Mennonite University), speaks about the often overlooked category of caste as a global form of discrimination. Anubhav Pradhan, COPE Council Member, hosts this talk and discussion…
  • Seminars and webinars

    Artificial intelligence and peer review

    In this session, COPE Council Member, Mike Streeter, hosts a discussion between Dustin Smith (Hum), and Mohammad Hosseini (postdoctoral researcher and collaborator at the Institute for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine) about the state of…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Handling undisclosed peer reviewer conflict

    Some authors from a company recommended a peer reviewer on submitting their manuscript, who was then asked to review the manuscript. This reviewer recommended acceptance without change. One other reviewer recommended major revision (a methodological reviewer not a content expert) and the third reviewer recommended rejection. The editor found it unusual for a review to recommend acceptance witho…
  • Case
    On-going

    Author retracts request to be removed from author list

    An author of a coauthored article published in our journal ten years ago contacted the outgoing editors with a request to have their name removed. The author in question is Dr A of University 1 and they are the paper’s first author. Their stated reason for doing so was that they had recently discovered errors in a table in the paper. The second author on the paper, Dr B, provided the original d…
  • Case
    On-going

    Author refusal to sign an ethics form

    A journal has received a submission which is based on patient data (CT scan images). The data have been found to have been taken from an open-source repository. The authors are refusing to sign an Ethics Approval and Consent for Authors form. Questions for the Forum Is a signature in these cases compulsory? How would the Forum recommend we hand…
  • Case
    On-going

    Reviewer citation manipulation

    This is a general scenario which has been observed in increasing numbers at our journal. We are finding that some reviewers provide a referee’s report which include a request to cite a number of papers, which on closer inspection are all authored by the referee. We would like to hear whether Forum participants have any policies or procedures for reviewers who are clearly manipulating cit…
  • Case
    On-going

    Concerns over the withdrawal of a complaint

    The journal received multiple complaints from two ‘whistleblowers’ in country A regarding the methodology presented in an article published in 2021. The Editors began an investigation into the paper, using evidence provided by the whistleblowers. The Editors felt that based on the provided evidence, an investigation should be carried out. The authors, who were also from country A, were made awa…
  • Case
    Case 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…
  • Forum discussion topics

    Peer review models

    … */ September 2023 Watch the int…
  • Seminars and webinars

    COPE webinar: Enhancing partnerships of institutions and journals

    …Cooperation between institutions and journals July 2023 For some years, COPE has been discussing the fundamental relationship between publication ethics and research ethics, publication ethics being part of research and research publishing. COPE has recently launched membership for selected, invited universities and institutes, and will open up this category of…
  • Case
    On-going

    How to handle offers of promotion of authorship for sale

    We have been approached via email by a company promoting authorship for sale. The email describes the service as providing 'co-authorship' of an existing article that has been submitted for publication in an indexed journal. The articles cover a range of disciplines and the company claims a high success rate for publication. Question for COPE Council: What steps sho…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Complaint over protocol used in special issue

    We launched a Special Issue (SI) focusing on the application of a particular clinical protocol, with guest editors that have an extensive clinical history in applying this protocol. This specific protocol is currently used and promoted by a small subset of practitioners, with limited wider recognition. The SI concluded with a substantial number of published articles, including several case repo…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Ukrainian authors request retraction of article published in Russian conference proceedings

    A journal has been contacted by a group of authors from Ukraine who wish to retract their article because of acute ethical issues in relation to the war with Russia. The authors are employees of a research institute in Ukraine. When preparing their article they were not fully informed about the country of the organisers of the conference. They are concerned that participation in a Russian confe…
  • Case
    Case Closed

    Balancing Anonymisation and Open Science during peer-review process

    As an editor of a journal with a double-anonymous peer review system, I often wonder about the right balance between open science practices and anonymisation of the manuscript for the review process. How much anonymisation is enough while being compatible with open science dissemination? In particular, when a manuscript includes information about the protocol registration and raw data, s…

Pages