- Case
Publishing a letter concerning a paper published in another journal many years ago
Recently, Journal X received a letter to the editor based on an article published in another journal about 8 years previously. The editors of Journal X believe this letter is important to their readers. The original article was a seminal paper which changed practice. However, a group of authors challenged some of the data published in this trial in a subsequent review published about 7 ye… - Case
Data integrity issues
Several years ago, a third party contacted the journal with concerns about data irregularities in two randomised controlled trials published about 10 years ago. Both of the papers were published before the journal had strict requirements on data upload to a public repository and availability. The journal sent an initial email to the corresponding author of both papers (the same author fo… - Case
Author accused of sexual harassment
A reviewer for Journal X declined to review a paper as author Y has been the subject of a sexual harassment investigation. Author Y left the institute before the result of the investigation, thereby avoiding the outcome of the case. There is an academic loophole which allows those accused of misconduct to avoid any potential consequences by resigning before the outcome of the investigation, mea… - Case
An unpublished PhD thesis included in an institutional library is submitted to an academic journal
A manuscript was submitted to Journal A. A routine CrossCheck report revealed a 70% match to the author's PhD thesis. The journal recommended that the author expand the article with new content. The author raised an objection, arguing that the PhD thesis is not published in a journal, but is only included in the institutional library. The journal noted that related issues had been… - Flowcharts
Addressing concerns about systematic manipulation of the publication process
…="https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/systematic-manipulation-publication-process">Systematic manipulation of the publication process flowcharts Managing paper mills COPE seminar, September 2022 How do we deal with the growing problem of paper mill - Seminars and webinars
Post-publication corrections
…misconduct JAMA Network article Handling difficult cases a discussion on PLOS Blog Related COPE resources Dealing with concerns about the integrity of… - Translated resources
Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (Portuguese)
…Transparência e melhores práticas, edição atualizada, Version 4.0, 2022 Transparência e melhores práticas Português - Revisado por Luciano Panepucci, após tradução automática via Documentos Google. Version 4.0, 2022. Edição anterior: Princípios de Transparência e Boas Práticas em… - Forum discussion topics
Editorial conflicts of interest
March 2022 Watch the introduction to the topic "Editorial conflicts of interest" with COPE Council member, Itamar Ashkenazi. - Forum discussion topics
Dealing with complaints about the integrity of published research
June 2022 Watch the introduction to the topic "Dealing with complaints about the integrity of published research" with COPE Council member, Jigisha Patel. - Case
Author requests permission to publish review comments
…reviews and a commentary on the issues raised, prior to submission to a journal with open peer review. The author requested the journal’s consent for the review comments to be made public under CC licence. We declined permission to publish the reviews and explained that the journal operates a confidential single blind review process. Reviewers are informed that their names will not be revealed to… - News
Letter from the COPE Chair: November 2019
…University of Cambridge, who emphasised how librarians can help address issues of publication ethics in their role as mentors to researchers and, in many cases, researchers in their own right. We hope you enjoy reading this month’s Digest. - News
Letter from the COPE Chair: January 2020
…regards, COPE Chair Deborah Poff In COPE's January Digest we launch the predatory publishing discussion document, hear from Helena… - News
Letter from the COPE Chair: January 2021
…We wish you all a safe and healthy beginning to the year, and look forward to engaging with you in 2021. COPE Chair Deborah Poff, CM,PhD - Case
Falsified references
An article was submitted to my journal and was sent for peer review. An editorial board member realised that a number of the references were incorrect: publication dates had been changed to make them more current. The author was contacted by email and telephone who said he/she had a number of students working for him (who were not listed as authors or in the acknowledgment) and they must… - News
Letter from the COPE Vice-Chair: May 2020
…author list after submission (27%); ghost, guest, or gift authorship (19%); and submission without the knowledge of one or more authors (19%), to name just a few. Just a reminder that, as a COPE member, the Forum is a great way to share your thoughts and perspectives with fellow editors and publishers. The next… - Case
Possible plagiarism and fabrication
…sentences and wording as the first. This concerns all parts of the paper. The only significant “new” sentences, mainly in the discussion, are on the role of drug C. 2. The second paper cites 27 references, 17 of which are identical to the references in the first paper. Of the 10 “new” references, six are on drug C, and two on issues related to the surgery. 3. Demographic and surgical data, reported as… - Case
Image manipulation case
A journal was contacted by a non-anonymous whistleblower pointing out problems with two figures in a published paper. The journal wrote to the authors, who provided them with films for the gels and an explanation and additional figure data for the histology image, where a mistake was made when assembling the images. The journal published an erratum and informed the whistleblower. Subsequ… - News
COPE in 2023
…A time to review and look forward In 2022, COPE celebrated its 25th year. While we celebrated this anniversary with pride in all that we have achieved over the past 25 years, we also took the opportunity to reflect on COPE’s role and purpose in a rapidly evolving research and publication landscape.… - Case
A(uthor) vs C(omplainant) authorship dispute
A was a researcher in C’s lab for 1 year, during which time they published a joint research paper in a third party journal (journal S). After leaving C’s institute (henceforth called institute X), A published in the journal (journal T as a sole author). The affiliation provided by A on the paper was institute X. All of the data reported in this paper were obtained while A was still employed at… - Seminars and webinars
Publication misconduct tools
…part of 'publication misconduct and fraud day'" class="media-element file-full" data-delta="2" src="https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/styles/full_content_width/public/seminar23-webpage-misconduct-tools.jpg?itok=QoQyDdDF" width="1200" height="500" /> COPE does not endorse any particular tools but supports all efforts to maintain the integrity of the…