brief foray into publication ethics

Key Concepts in

Publication Ethics

Chris Graf

Treasurer, Committee on Publication Ethics

Editorial Director, Wiley-Blackwell

cgraf@wiley.com

http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2011/08/15/duplicate-submission-from-2002-in-american-journal-of-psychiatry-earns-an-expression-of-concern/

http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2011/08/09/education-researcher-leaves-post-after-rampant-plagiarism-revealed/

http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2011/08/09/two-papers-to-be-retracted-after-ori-finds-misconduct-by-boston-university-cancer-researcher/

• Background

– Our Guidelines (with detail later)

– COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)

– Survey of editors, Audit of journals

• Key ethical considerations

Agenda

2007

Our guidelines

• >30 citations

• Widely used

• Inspired other publishers to act

http:/ /bit. ly/azBf78

Graf C, Wager E, Bowman A et al. Int J Clin Pract 2007;61(s152):1–26.

doi:10.1111/j.1742-1241.2006.01230.x

2007

All our editors are

members of COPE

2007

COPE is still a forum: 400 cases

Unethical research Unethical editorial decisions

Plagiarism

Authorship

Fabrication, falsification

Our ethics survey

• “Most editors … seem not very

concerned about publication ethics“

• We were surprised

http:/ /bit. ly/c8p6N7

Wager E, Fiack S, Graf C et al. J Med Ethics 2009;35:348-353.

doi:10.1136/jme.2008.028324

2008

2009

Our ethics audit

• Step 1

• Worked with editors

• Harvested information

about their approach

to ethics

http:/ /bit. ly/abFfDS

The COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) audit tool

2009

2010

Our Audit Guidance

• Step 2

• Guidance for editors

• Focus: consistently high-

quality policies, processes

2010

2011

That’s the background

• Our guidelines were written to offer:

– Practical advice

– Best practice statements

– Links to “gold standards”

Detail from guidelines

http://wwwjp.blackwellpublishing.com/bw/publicationethics/

Key ethical consideration #1

• Transparency

– Who funded the work?

– Who did the work?

(Authorship in detail)

– Has the work been published before?

Authorship in detail

• Authors should meet 1, 2, and 3*:

– 1) substantial contributions to conception

and design, or acquisition of data, or

analysis and interpretation of data; and

– 2) drafting the article or revising it critically

for important intellectual content; and

– 3) final approval of the version to be

published

*International Committee of Medical Journal of Editors http://www.icmje.org/ethical_1author.html

Authorship in detail

• For people who made a contribution but

who don’t meet 1 + 2 + 3?

– List names and describe contributions

– As an “Acknowledgement”

Key ethical consideration #2

• Research integrity

– Research misconduct

– Rights of research participants

(eg Informed consent, Privacy)

– Respecting cultures and heritage

– Informing readers about problems

(In detail)

Inform readers about problems

• Correction (erratum) for errors in data

or information, whatever the cause

• “Retraction” if work is proven* fraud

– Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism

– Publish a statement of retraction, not

remove article

– *Proven usually by authors’ employer or

governing body

Key ethical consideration #3

• Editorial standards and processes

– Peer review

– Appeals

– Conflicts of interest

(Editors, authors, peer reviewers)

– Editorial independence

– Accuracy and debate

Conflicts of interest

• Editors, authors, peer reviewers

• Disclose interests that might appear

to affect objectivity

• Financial (eg patent ownership, stock

ownership, consultancies, speaker's

fees), personal, political, intellectual,

religious

Chris Graf

Treasurer, Committee on Publication Ethics

Editorial Director, Wiley-Blackwell

cgraf@wiley.com