- Flowcharts
Responding to whistleblowers when concerns are raised via social media
COPE's guidelines, as a flowchart, on how to respond to whistleblowers when concerns are raised about a published article on a social media site. How should you respond when a published article is criticised on social media or a post-publication peer review site(s)? The criticism could include anonymous or not anonymous concerns about scientific soundness or allegations of plagiarism… - Flowcharts
Responding to whistleblowers when concerns are raised directly
…allegations of plagiarism, figure manipulation or other forms of misconduct. Responding to whistleblowers when concerns are raised directly - Seminars and webinars
Publication misconduct tools
…transparency and science both post-submission and post-acceptance stages. The hope is that it will lead to the need for fewer retractions by identifying high risk papers before they get to publication. Text analysis and plagiarism: AI a thought partner for humans Lee Gaul spoke on behalf of Copyleaks, where he is the Head of Enterprise Sales. Copyleaks is an AI platform which performs text… - Flowcharts
Systematic manipulation of the publication process
Identify potential fraudulent activity and use the flowcharts when handling suspected manipulation. Suggested actions are recommended for each type of suspicious activity. Systematic manipulation of the publication process - Case
Suspicion of breach of proper peer reviewer behaviour
The Forum suggested that the editor should follow the flowchart on “What to do if you suspect a reviewer has appropriated an author’s idea or data” in such cases. Even if the other journal has published the paper first, the editor can consult the submission dates for confirmation. The first journal would then have to retract the paper on the grounds of plagiarism, if indeed this had been… - Case
Parallels between unpublished manuscript and a published article from other authors
I am seeking advice on a confidential ‘letter of concern’ from an author (X) of a manuscript submitted before I was appointed editor of the journal but rejected by me on the advice of the associate editor. Author X is concerned with similarities or parallels between his manuscript, rejected in 2008, and a recently published article. I have looked over our file and contacted the associate… - Case
Co authors’ unwillingness to support retraction of a review
A review by three authors, with Dr X as the lead author, was published in Journal A. Five months later, the editor of Journal A was informed by Professor W that a figure in the review by Dr X had originally appeared in a research paper, co-authored by Professor W in Journal B in 1990. The professor also said that Dr X had published the same or very similar figures in journals C, D (research pap… - Case
Potential fabrication of data in primary studies included in a meta-analysis accepted for publication
…A. Professor X claims strong evidence of plagiarism, and questions whether the trials took place at all. He also notes that he has previously written to the authors of the trials but says that few have responded. Those that did respond, he believes, have failed to provide reassuring responses. Example response from authors sent to Professor X include the following: “The work has been… - Seminars and webinars
Good Publication Practice 2022
…research integrity and publication quality; Jing Wang (Radboud University, The Netherlands), who proposed new quality criteria for journal ranking; and Hongmei Zhu (3rd People’s Hospital of Chengdu and Southwest Jiaotong University, China), who discussed artificial intelligence in plagiarism detection.… - CaseOn-going
Two reviewer reports contain a significant amount of verbatim textual overlap
…other reviewers. In the end, it has to be a judgement call by the editor. Whether or not the editor decides to invite these researchers to review other submissions depends on whether he accepts their explanations. One suggestion was to use plagiarism detection software on the reviewer reports and the special issue as a background check. This may give some indication of the overlap. Another… - CaseClosed: author misconduct
Falsified references
…plagiarism issues in three other journals by the same publisher and the plagiarism involved both submitted and published manuscripts. There were also coauthors for several of these papers. The editor contacted the author's dean, as did another editor. The editor received an email from the dean thanking the editor for her efforts. The research compliance officer for the university became involved, the… - Research
Exploring publication ethics in the arts, humanities, and social sciences: A COPE study 2019
…">Survey findings Completed by more than 650 journal editors (not solely COPE members), the study showed the following key findings: 64% of respondents encountered issues addressing language and writing quality barriers while seeking to remain inclusive. 58% reported detecting plagiarism as the most serious issue they dealt with, followed by fraudulent submissions (44%) and data or image… - Discussion documents
Responding to anonymous whistleblowers, January 2013
…feedback on it. We may post the responses on our website and may revise the document in response Request for guidance from COPE There are now many hundreds or possibly even thousands of anonymous email requests that have been sent to editors insisting that they investigate a case of alleged plagiarism within their journal, which usually are claimed to have been detected… - Case
Duplicate publication: how much is too much?
_ The authors had failed to declare any overlap, and this could possibly be a case of plagiarism. _ Two independent reviewers should decide on the degree of overlap. _ The editor should inform the reviewers of the background of the case.… - Case
An article in a high profile journal that potentially misappropriates research published in lower impact journals
It has been drawn to our attention that a paper published in a high-impact journal in the field of biological sciences (Journal A) draws very heavily on research published in the lower-impact factor journal for which we work (Journal B), as well as on work published in other journals. One of the authors of the paper in Journal B has contacted the editor of Journal A to register his/her concern… - CaseOn-going
Allegation of authorship misconduct
…alleged plagiarism of ideas or method. The approach the journal should take therefore devolves on two issues: first the evidence for ‘theft’; and second, the nature of any prior contact between the two author/author groups which could explain how the ideas could have been accessed. On the first point, it does not appear as though any definite proof has been found to support theft of notes… - Case
The judgement of Solomon: a case of two strikingly similar papers
…conference organisers to ask if they could reveal the names of the reviewers of author A’s paper, but they refused. Our editors could find no evidence of plagiarism, except they did agree that the application of the method in this particular context was, to quote one of our editors, “striking” in its similarity. Group B responded robustly to our request for further details. They said that although… - Seminars and webinars
European Seminar 2019: Exploring Publication Ethics Issues in the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences
…globally and the quality of papers due to issues around language skills and access to literature. 2) Issues with detecting plagiarism and poor attribution standards was encountered by 58% of respondents. This was particularly prevalent among Business, Finance and Economics editors (79% of editors working in these fields). 3) 55% of respondents highlighted… - Seminars and webinars
How to get started: COPE resources
…Presentation to PAMJE Annual Convention March 2023 COPE Council Member, Jigisha Patel, presented at the Philippines Association of Medical Journal Editors (PAMJE) Annual Convention discussing how COPE tools can be practically used to help journal editors address various ethical publication issues. Jigisha began by introducing COPE and COPE resources, with… - Seminars and webinars
European Seminar 2019: COPE retraction guidelines
Session on retractions at the European Seminar 2019, with speaker Howard Browman who shares a review of the updated Retraction Guidelines from COPE. During the session we also heard from Thed Van Leeuwen and Catriona Fennell. Links to their presentations are below: Watch now