- Discussion documents
Sharing of information among editors-in-chief regarding possible misconduct
… 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 guidance has been updated following a COPE Forum Discussion in 2013, initiated in… - Discussion documents
Artificial intelligence (AI) in decision making
…transparency on the limitations is essential. Recommendations are made for publishers, editors, and authors on the ethical application of AI. Related resources Authorship and AI tools, COPE position statement, Feb 2023 - Discussion documents
Diversity and inclusivity
…publishing, COPE webinar 2021 Bias in peer review, COPE Forum discussion, October 2021 What does peer review mean in the arts, humanities and social sciences?,… - Discussion documents
Citation manipulation
…2019 Citations: link, locate, discover, connect Guest article, August 2018 Self-citation: where's the line? Forum discussion, November 2017 Your feedback COPE… - Discussion documents
Dealing with concerns about the integrity of published research
…://publicationethics.org/resources/discussion-documents/addressing-ethics-complaints-complainants-who-submit-multiple-issue-1">Addressing ethics complaints from complainants who submit multiple issues COPE discussion document, 2015 Handling of post-publication critiques COPE flowchart - Discussion documents
Predatory publishing
…href="https://publicationethics.org/news/identifying-fake-journals">Identifying fake journals COPE Officers' statement, April 2023 Avoiding predatory publishers Guest editorial, February 2022 Predatory publishing: next steps and where do we go from here? COPE Forum discussion, December 2020… - Discussion documents
Who 'owns' peer reviews? September 2017
…-discussion-topic-march-2020%20">Editing of reviewer comments Forum discussion, March 2020 Editing of reviewer comments survey, June 2020 Your feedback COPE welcomes feedback to this ongoing debate from publishers, journal editors, reviewers, researchers, institutions, librarians, funders, and other stakeholders.… - Discussion documents
Authorship
The COPE authorship discussion document introduces issues and aims to stimulate discussion around authorship. COPE welcomes comments which add to the ongoing debate. Authorship can refer to individuals or groups that create an idea or develop the publication that disseminates that intellectual or creative work; however, appropriately acknowledging roles and contributions is not always… - Discussion documents
Guest edited collections best practice
…clarification of the ethical responsibilities throughout the various stages of the process. COPE welcomes comments which add to the ongoing discussion about the topic. Best practices for guest edited collections … - Discussion documents
Responding to anonymous whistleblowers, January 2013
This paper aims to stimulate discussion about how editors should respond to emails from whistle blowers. We encourage journal editors and publishers to comment (whether or not they are COPE members), and also welcome comments from researchers/authors and academic institutions. - Discussion documents
Preprints
The COPE preprints discussion document addresses how preprints serve research communities, with guidance on navigating the ethical challenges and opportunities presented to journal editors. COPE welcomes comments which add to this ongoing debate. The benefits of preprints are addressed such as accelerating research communication and establishing precedence; giving editors opportunities… - Discussion documents
Best practice in theses publishing. March 2017
Introduction Traditionally, theses for higher degrees were published by universities in hard copy only. Now increasingly, these are also archived and may be made freely available via university repositories. They may or may not have associated licenses such as those from Creative Commons which also allow reuse. Questions have arisen at COPE forums and other… - Discussion documents
Handling competing interests
This COPE discussion document introduces issues around competing interests/conflicts of interest and describes practical issues which might occur when handling cases. COPE welcomes comments which add to the ongoing debate. Competing interests (also known as conflicts of interests - COIs) may arise during research, writing, and publication processes, and can be briefly defined as being… - Discussion documents
Addressing ethics complaints from complainants who submit multiple issues
…class="resource-download-inline__shadow"> Examples of multiple complaints Complaints may deal with matters outside the remit of the journal, such as personal complaints against an author or editor. Repeated complaints may be trivial or inaccurate allegations about published articles. COPE has seen cases where repeated… - Discussion documents
How should editors respond to plagiarism? April 2011
…institutions, issuing corrections, and issuing retractions. The current COPE flowcharts recommend different responses to major and minor plagiarism. Possible, more detailed, definitions of these are proposed for discussion. Decisions about when to use text-matching software are also outlined. The appendix describes other systems for classifying plagiarism and links to related documents and resources.