As described throughout this issue of IRQ, the need for research and good published outcomes in IR has become more important than ever. In the rush to publicize findings, though, it’s equally critical to ensure ethical conduct. Although most of us would never deliberately commit publishing misconduct (any more than we would knowingly commit any other breach of professional ethics), some may act unethically without knowing it—tarnishing their own reputation, that of the publishing journal and potentially even others’ perception of the field.
To avoid these pitfalls, a researcher and author is obliged to become familiar with the ethical boundaries to scientific publishing in all their many forms. This article explores some of the main forms of publishing misconduct, as described on the Elsevier Ethics in Research & Publication website, ethics.elsevier.com.
DUPLICATE SUBMISSION describes the submission of a paper (or portions of a paper) that has been published elsewhere without disclosing the prior submission(s). Publishing the same study results in multiple resources can lead to inadvertent double counting or inappropriate weighting of the results of that study, distorting the available evidence.
RESEARCH FRAUD is publishing invented or manipulated data or conclusions that were not generated by scientific process. Both fabrication—making up research data and results—and falsification— changing or omitting data or results, research materials, images, etc. such that the research is not accurately represented—are both serious forms of misconduct because they result in a scientific record that does not accurately reflect observed truth.
PLAGIARISM refers to an author’s deliberate use of another’s work without permission, credit or acknowledgment. Plagiarism can take the form of verbatim copying (in whole or in part), substantial copying, paraphrasing, or text recycling. Journals use many means to try to detect this. Self-plagiarism is another concern; it ranges from unacknowledged republication of an authors’s prior work—a major form of publishing misconduct—to copying only segments from prior self-authored papers. Even the latter is an issue, as that published earlier text is owned (by copyright) by its publisher. Authors are not free to simply repeat identical text, even in smaller forms.
AUTHORSHIP problems refer to deliberately misrepresenting a scientist’s relationship to the submitted work, which undermines confidence in the reporting of the work itself. Criteria for authorship are important—meaningful contributions are essential, rather than “courtesy” or “collateral” authorship.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST represents a failure by an investigator, author, editor or reviewer to disclose a financial or personal interest or belief that could affect his or her objectivity. Such conflicts can undermine the credibility of the research, its authors and the journal.
SALAMI SLICING is the “slicing” of research that would naturally fit in in one manuscript into several different papers (i.e., the “least publishable unit.”) This inflates the authors’ curricula vitae but can lead unsuspecting readers to believe that data presented in each article is derived from a different subject sample.
Quiz yourself
Valuable information on all these forms of publishing misconduct, how to avoid them, and much more can be found on the Ethics in Research & Publication website offered by JVIR publisher Elsevier. Visit www.ethics.elsevier.com to learn how to differentiate between scientific and publishing misconduct and what constitutes a breach of publishing ethics. The Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) and other tools also help you make sure you’re avoiding the potential problems outlined in this article. You can even take an ethics quiz and determine for yourself just how well you know your publishing ethics.
