- News
In the news: June 2018 Digest
…href="https://orcid.org/blog/2018/05/09/orcid-japan-re-thatching-roof" target="_blank">https://orcid.org/blog/2018/05/09/orcid-japan-re-thatching-roof Diversity Dr. Kris Sealey describes a research study for which she is the primary investigator that focuses on “how issues of diversity might be addressed at the level of producing the scholarly object”. They seek to determine best practices and a code of publication ethics in the humanities. … - Case
No ethics approval or informed consent?
A thesis published by a student was submitted by his guide for publication. One of the journal editors found the research unethical and asked for confirmation of ethics committee approval. The editor received a verbal commitment that the approval had been given prior to the research being started and the approval letter would be submitted in due course. However, on further investigation by the… - Case
Definition of plagiarism?
…that this is not an isolated incident, the editor has been advised to contact the institute with details of this specific allegation. However, we were interested to note that advice from our legal department clearly stated that plagiarism could only be proven if the alleged plagiarism was word-for-word the same as the original text, with the implication that as the text was in a different… - Case
Possible conflict of interest
Our journal is attempting to encourage the adoption of a uniform standard for the reporting of population genetics data. As part of this, one of the editors of our journal has submitted a proposal requiring authors to submit their data, including raw data, to his own database. While the intention is laudable, there would appear to be a clear conflict of interest. What can a journal do… - Event
Scientific symposium and 4th EQUATOR Annual Lecture
Equator would like to invite you to the scientific symposium and 4th EQUATOR Annual Lecture organised by the EQUATOR Network and the German Cochrane Centre. The symposium will be of great interest to health research scientists and clinicians, journal editors and peer reviewers, reporting guideline developers, publishers, research funders and other professionals involved in research… - News
Case Discussion: Inconclusive institutional investigation into authorship dispute
…case is labeled on the cases website (https://publicationethics.org/case/inconclusive-institutional-investigat...) as relating to core practice of “Authorship and contributorship” and “Post-publication discussions and corrections.” A closely related core practice is “Journal management.” All… - News
In the news: November 2020
…to honest error; and, the stigma of retractions can be hard to clean up. Research integrity The authors of this paper analysed 250 citations from five leading scientific journals. They found 25% of quotation references are incorrect or misleading or fail to provide evidence for the claims… - Seminars and webinars
UK Seminar 2010: Plagiarism screening: An update from CrossCheck
…Download "Plagiarism screening: An update from CrossCheck" presentation [PDF, 6500KB]… - News
FORUM DISCUSSION TOPIC: comments please
…Predatory publishing The next online COPE Forum, Monday 5 November 2018, 4pm-5.30pm (GMT), follows the usual format where members' cases are presented for discussion and advice from all those participating in the Forum. Register for the Forum (COPE members only) The… - Case
Managing an editor’s undisclosed conflict of interest in a published article
…round of peer review with an unbiased handling editor would be appropriate to uphold the integrity of the journal’s review process and to ensure transparency around possible conflicts of interest. This plan was communicated to the authors. The authors responded stating that they were concerned that given the nature of the controversy, and the post-publication debate, that another round of peer review… - Case
Excessive self-citation in a book chapter
…publisher proceed? Although excessive self-citation was confirmed, the content of the work seems to be valid and did not appear to include any instances of plagiarism or research misconduct. … - Case
An appropriate response to concerns of research validity
A paper describing a novel technique was submitted. Three out of four external reviewers felt that the results could not be true. The manufacturers of the tool used in the technique provided evidence to support the reviewers’ claims that the results were not feasible. The editor wrote to the authors asking them to explain their results. The authors replied saying that they were unable… - Case
Plagiarism and publication fee
A journal’s editors were informed about a plagiarism case just before the last step in the volume publication process. The publication fee for the paper was already paid by the author and the author completed and signed the publication agreement in which confirmed the paper's originality. The author was informed of the plagiarism issue and also that the paper would be withdrawn from… - Case
Secondary analysis of medical records and ethics committee approval
A journal received a manuscript using secondary analysis of existing medical records in which there was no indication that ethics approval was obtained from a recognized ethics review board or that participants gave their informed consent to be included in the study. Instead, the authors explained that the study had been based on a secondary analysis of existing medical records and that no… - Case
The unacceptable use of a placebo
_ Ethics committee approval should be requested, but how far could this be challenged if the authors had it, in which case the local ethics committee in question should be queried. _ It was correct to trial an established treatment against a new treatment, and not just a placebo. But it would be wrong to test a drug against other drugs that had been found to be ineffective. _ The editor… - Case
Transparency of peer review to co-authors
An associate editor of one of our journals has asked whether we can configure our online peer review system to restrict access to reviewer correspondence to corresponding authors. His concern is that some of the review materials (eg, a harsh critique) might be embarrassing for the principal investigator if accessed by a co-author who was a junior investigator or laboratory technician.… - Research
Prevalence and attitudes towards plagiarism in biomedical publishing 2010
…of plagiarism and attitudes towards plagiarism in the scientific community. The prevalence of plagiarism in a biomedical journal will be measured using CrossCheck, eTBLAST, and WCopyFind plagiarism detection software. All papers submitted to the Croatian Medical Journal (CMJ, an international peer-reviewed open-access journal; http://www.cmj.hr) in 2009 and… - Case
Author refuses to comply with editorial review prior to production and publication
…editor-in-chief when they are appointed. The section editor recommended the article for acceptance with the proposed editorial revisions and overall there was agreement that the revisions improved readability and clarity especially for readers that may not be well acquainted with the overall topic of the paper. There had also been some issues during the review process with the authors not always… - News
COPE collaboration with FORCE11 Working Group
…develop or refine their policies, and to help editors handle individual situations they encounter. In line with our goal to support our members by providing practical resources, COPE is collaborating with the newly formed FORCE11 Research Data Publishing Ethics Working Group (WG) to lead the development of standards for research… - News
Ethical Editing – Autumn 2012 issue
Download the Autumn issue of Ethical Editing, the newsletter from COPE. This issue's theme is ''Connections''. We would very much welcome any feedback or comments you may have. Please contact us via the website.…