Update on Scholarly Publication Ethics: Navigating the Confusing Landscape

Abstract

### Publication Ethics Publication ethics is not a novel concept, nor is it one for which there is little information in the literature. However, because policies and best practice benchmarks are continually evolving, we thought that our readers may appreciate an update on the topic. Since writing this piece, we've already received two e-alerts from Retraction Watch containing the following headlines: “Confusion reigns: Are these four retractions for compromised peer review, or not?” and “Authors in 2014 peer review ring lose 4 more papers each for ‘compromised’ review.” Similar announcements continue daily. Like you, we educate ourselves regularly by reviewing cases and new information from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, www.publicationethics.org), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME, www.wame.org), the International Society for Technical and Medical Editors (ISTME, www.ismte.org) and the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP, www.sspnet.org) along with blogs such as The Scholarly Kitchen (https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/). A Google search for “publication ethics” yields 2,330,000 hits, so we are not without resources in this regard. Yet why do these problems persist? ### The Ever-Changing Landscape On August 6, 1991, the Internet was officially born.1 Although the Internet vastly broadened the availability of and access to research, it has also made plagiarism much simpler to execute—whole sections are now only a copy and paste away. This can be a particular challenge in fast-moving fields like aesthetic surgery, which change rapidly in both the surgical and non-surgical space. New technology breeds innovation but it also fosters the temptation to take shortcuts. One example is salami slicing, a form of redundant publication in which authors segment their own work to create multiple journal articles that share hypothesis, methodology, and/or results and afford them more publications on their curriculum vitae (CV). These repetitive articles dilute the literature and are obvious to anyone reading beyond the abstract. With so many resources … Corresponding Author: Mr Christopher Reid, 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA. E-mail: christopher.reid{at}oup.com

Ähnliche Arbeiten