COPE believes that authors and institutions should treat lists of predatory (or fake) journals with the same degree of scrutiny as they do with the journals themselves.

Over the past few months we have been working with Crossref, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) to build a hub for publishers with limited resources or little experience, to easily discover resources from each of the organisations in one place.

One of us (RW) published an editorial in his journal on the use of ChatGPT in writing academic manuscripts. ChatGPT (a chatbot developed by OpenAI) was included in the author list in the interests of transparency.

There has been a tweet circulating recently which gives instructions on how to remove a peanut butter sandwich from a video recorder, written in the style of Biblical verse. It’s very funny – at least until you realise that it was written by an AI bot. At that stage it becomes very clever, but it loses all the humour.

This page is regularly updated

Go to latest news update April 2023

As part of Peer Review Week 2022, COPE hosted the webinar Practical steps for managing paper mills. The speakers give practical tips on how to manage systematic manipulation of the publication process, at scale, and describe their experience of dealing with paper mills affecting their journals,

On Thursday 15 September, ISMTE held its delayed webinar on Responding to World Events, which had originally been conceived following Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing issues faced by publishers and editors on whether to make public statements or how to join various sanctions placed on Russia.

The revised  Good Publication Practice” (GPP) guidelines is now freely available, published 30 August 2022

Welcome to our annual edition of Digest celebrating Peer Review Week (19-23 September). This year’s theme is “Research Integrity: Creating and supporting trust in research”.

The phenomenon of organised paper mills has been drawing greater attention over recent years across the academic publishing community, with improving detection tools revealing the extensive scale of these operations and the implications this has on the integrity of the research literature.