- Case
Provenance of a correction: undisclosed court case involvement
…witness in a trial relating to the drug in question (the LTTE was shown to the drug company’s counsel during the trial). The LTTE does not mention this. The drug company also claims that the letter’s corrections are based on its work and cross examination in court (again not stated in the LTTE). It also claims the author does not disclose or correct all the errors and downplays others. The company says… - Case
Seeking retrospective ethics approval
As mentioned many times at the COPE Forum, just because a study has been approved by an institutional review board does not mean that the editor has to consider it to be ethical or to publish it. Also, institutional review board approval does not guarantee that the study is not flawed. Some questioned what kind of an institution would approve such a study in vulnerable patients. Others… - Case
Retraction update?
…information than that provided in the original retraction. Questions(1) What form should this update take to ensure that it is properly indexed and recognized?(2) Should it be published as an ‘update’, as a ‘corrigendum’ or as a new version of the retraction?… - Forum discussion topics
COPE Forum 4 December 2013: persistent complainers
…How should a journal deal with persistent complainers? The topic for discussion at this Forum was ‘How should a journal deal with persistent complainers?’ Background Every so often a journal may get not one, but a series of complaints from the same source. These complaints may be directed at an author, an editor, or the journal in general. If these… - Discussion documents
How should editors respond to plagiarism? April 2011
…plagiarism? If so, is the distinction between major and minor plagiarism useful or do we need more categories? What types of plagiarism should prompt journals to inform authors’ institutions? What other sanctions should journals impose on authors for plagiarism? How should journals handle cases of the various forms of plagiarism in submitted and published work? … - News
Letter from the COPE Chair and Vice-Chair
…urbanisation: perspectives from the Global South” on day 4. Also on day 4 (5 October) we feature a debate on “AI and peer review” which will explore differing views on this challenging topic. The final day of the seminar (6 October) begins with a discussion on “Inclusive language: policing or progressive?”, and ends with a webinar on the fundamentals of publication integrity as Council members present… - News
Letter from the COPE co-Chairs: July 2018
…applications using these criteria, amongst others. The second, research transparency, is something that we can support and make easy (or at least easier) for the researchers who we serve. It’s arguable that transparency will make… - Event
COPE Seminar 2021
…="https://publicationethics.org/resources/seminars-and-webinars/research-publication-ethics">Watch keynote address webinar Ethical authorship versus fraudulent authorship Unethical authorship practices include guest, gift, and ghost authorship, as well as not obtaining consent from co-authors and adding fake names as co-authors. Knowingly publishing in predatory journals or using paper mills to buy or sell authorship could also be classed… - News
Letter from the COPE Chair: June 2022
…publishers, or elsewhere". This panel was organised by Matt Hodgkinson (COPE Council Member), who spoke on behalf of journals and publishers. Joining him on the panel were Paul Saner from the University of Cape Town and scientific integrity consultant Elisabeth Bik. All three panelists gave engaging presentations on their perspectives of what works and what doesn’t when reporting issues to different… Revised principles of transparency and best practice released
…nationality, political beliefs or religion of the author. Natalie Ridgeway, COPE Executive Officer, says, "This edition of the Principles has been fully updated to provide greater depth and clarity in how to achieve transparency and best practices in journal publications for today's publishing environment. Importantly, we believe these practices are fully achievable by all scholarly journals,…- Case
Suspected contact between reviewer and an author led to coauthorship of the reviewer
…version was co-authored by two authors: he and reviewer A. The conclusion of the editors was that indeed there was serious misconduct, most probably on the side of the reviewer. We can only speculate if there is misconduct on the side of the author or of both people together. The author was asked by email to explain how the second author, reviewer A, had been included as a co-author of… Projects Funded
…the results synthesis and manuscript preparation. We also collected data on authorship policies in journals from different disciplines, as well as definitions and policies of different professional, academic or research organizations or associations. These results are now being written up in a second manuscript. The results of this part of the research will be presented at the- News
Diversity, equity, inclusivity and accessibility: COPE commentary
…established a COPE subcommittee on DEIA. It aims to develop COPE’s approach in DEIA, especially in support of individuals and groups who experience systematic discrimination or who have been historically marginalised. It also pushes for improved policies and procedures, aiming to ensure that COPE drives the conversation in DEIA… - Webform
Journal membership application form
…decision on membership, based on the application, the information reviewed and more subtle forms of assessment using the Membership subcommittee's experience. Note: All correspondence to members is sent via email unless otherwise requested COPE reserves the right to withdraw membership if incorrect information is given in this form or comes to light… Why the Code of Conduct for Journal Editors was replaced with the Core Practices
…href="https://publicationethics.org/membership">a membership organisation with no statutory or regulatory powers. COPE’s intention is to advise on what the expectations are of core practices for all journals, editors and publishers to work towards, with the aim of building a set of professional practices, not just for members of COPE. COPE’s role is to assist editors of…- News
Letter from the COPE co-Chairs: November 2018
…COPE and all the help it could offer for situations like mine. This year’s issues of Digest have reflected COPE’s 10 Core Practices. COPE has extensive resources dealing with this tenth and final Core Practice (link) Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections. All deal with the complexities of post-publication issues including correcting, revising, or retracting manuscripts post-publication.… - News
COPE authorship workshop February 2021
…class="lexicon-term">authorship in a published paper Workshop dates and registration The workshop is free for COPE members. REGISTER for the COPE workshop that suits your time zone: Wednesday 10 February 2021, 15:00 - 16:30 PM (GMT); 10.00-11.30am (EST) 10 February workshop is now full or - Event
COPE Forum: March 2023
…2. Forum discussion topic We begin the COPE Forum with a discussion on the topic of Artificial intelligence and fake papers. Whether or not you attend the Forum we welcome your… - Case
The tortuous tale of a paper, a letter and an editorial
…eventually have a reply in journal X. On 15 July, the letter from Dr B was published in journal X, together with a strong rebuttal from Dr A. On 8 November, Dr B’s article was published in journal Y. No mention of either his letter or Dr A’s response in journal X was made, and the editor of journal Y had seen neither piece of correspondence. The editor of journal X complained to his colleagues at journal… - Case
Is retraction justified because of an author dispute over permission to use data?
…previously in error. The journal could publish a correction or an acknowledgement but the committee felt that the editor should hold firm and not agree to a retraction. The committee felt that contacting the author’s institution was not necessary in this instance.…