Webinar on editorial policies

Webinar on
Editorial Policies
‫حسنين‬ ‫عطيفى‬ ‫أبوالعال‬ ‫الدكتور‬ ‫األستاذ‬
‫االصطناعى‬ ‫والذكاء‬ ‫الحاسبات‬ ‫بكلية‬ ‫االستاذ‬
–
‫ومؤسس‬ ‫القاهرة‬ ‫جامعة‬
‫المصرية‬ ‫البحثية‬ ‫العلمية‬ ‫المدرسة‬ ‫ورئيس‬
Topics:
Author Responsibilities and Ethics
Competing Interests
Peer-Review Policy
Data Availability and Standards of Reporting
‫الموافق‬ ‫الثالثاء‬
14
‫سبتمبر‬
2021
‫مساء‬ ‫السادسة‬ ‫الساعة‬

Scientific
Research-based
Innovation and
Creativity
Environments and humanity
Webinar on Editorial Policies: Journals and Proceedings by Professor Aboul Ella Hassanien

Agenda
• Author Responsibilities and Ethics
– Authorship Principles
– Data transparency
– Role of the Corresponding Author
• Competing Interests
– Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
– Citations
– Confidentiality
– Corrections and Retractions
– Appeals and Complaints
– Predatory Journals and References
• Data Availability and Standards of Reporting
– Data Availability Statements
– Standards of Reporting

Combating
plagiarism

How can we reduce
plagiarism?
Cite your source
Paraphrase
Present
your own
idea
Include
quotations
Use a
plagiarism
checker

Can plagiarism
be removed?
There is no magical way to remove the plagiarism. The best way to avoid
plagiarism is to phrase your own words and sentences. If you are expressing
someone else's ideas, you should always cite the person involved. Always use
plagiarism tools to make sure your article is genuine.

Duplicate and translation
publication
Duplicate (or redundant) publication occurs
when an author reuses substantial parts of
their own published work without providing
the appropriate references. This can range
from publishing an identical paper in multiple
journals, to only adding a small amount of
new data to a previously published paper.
One of the most
rewarding aspects for
academic authors is the
academic clout that is
achieved when it is
included in a reputable
index.

Contributors statement
Why do we need statements to define
the contributions made by each author?
it clearly defines each author's role in the research and hence to
some extent also their responsibility in the case of misconduct
(such as dual publication),
serves to discourage guest
authorship
Author contribution statements are now mandatory and author
responsibilities have been clarified*.
*https://www.nature.com/articles/ncb0609-667b

Authorship
• All authors whose names appear on the
submission:
1. made substantial contributions to the conception or
design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or
interpretation of data; or the creation of new software
used in the work;
2. drafted the work or revised it critically for important
intellectual content;
3. approved the version to be published; and
4. agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in
ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or
integrity of any part of the work are appropriately
investigated and resolved.
Publisher assumes that all
authors agreed with the content
and that all gave explicit
consent to submit and that
they obtained consent from the
responsible authorities at the
institute/organization where the
work has been carried out,
before the work is submitted.
Journals encourage collaboration with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted, and
expect their inclusion as co-authors when they fulfill all authorship criteria described above.
Contributors who do not meet all criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgements section.
which academics communicate
the results of their scholarly
work, establish priority for their
discoveries, and build their
reputation among their peers.

Role of the 1st Author
• First author is the one who carries out the bulk of
the experiments, while having an important
contribution to experimental design, data analysis,
interpretation and writing of the paper. The
corresponding author is in most cases the principal
investigator. He has major contribution in the
design of the work
• The first author is usually the person who made
the most significant intellectual contribution to
the work. That includes designing the study,
acquiring and analyzing data from experiments
and writing the actual manuscript.
• The first author should be that person who
contributed most to the work, including writing
of the manuscript.

Role of the Corresponding
Author
• The Corresponding Author is responsible
for the following requirements:
– ensuring that all listed authors have approved the
manuscript before submission, including the names
and order of authors;
– managing all communication between the Journal
and all co-authors, before and after publication*;
– providing transparency on re-use of material and
mention any unpublished material (for example
manuscripts in press) included in the manuscript in a
cover letter to the Editor;
– making sure disclosures, declarations and
transparency on data statements from all authors are
included in the manuscript as appropriate.
The corresponding author is the
point of contact for editors,
readers, and outside researchers
who have questions about the
contents of the paper.

What am I expected to do as a
corresponding author?
Ensure that major deadlines are met
Prepare a submission-ready manuscript
Put together a submission package
Take the lead on open access
Ensure ethical practices are followed
Get all author details right
The order
of authors
signed
consent
authorship
contribution
statement
manage the payment and invoicing of article processing
charges (APCs),

First authors
• First author is the one who carries out
the bulk of the experiments, while
having an important contribution to
experimental design, data analysis,
interpretation and writing of the paper.
The corresponding author is in most
cases the principal investigator. He
has major contribution in the design of
the work
• The first author should be that
person who contributed most to the
work, including writing of the
manuscript.
Last authors
• The last author is usually the senior
scientist, or PI. They might lead the
research group the first author belongs
to. Their role in the project varies.
They could make a large contribution,
or simply offer guidance.
First author vs. Last author

Shared co-first
authorship is defined
as two or more authors
who have worked
together on a publication
and contributed
equally
Can there be 2 first authors?
co-first authorship
To the co-first authors: Metrics such as the number of first author papers still
play a substantial role in hiring, tenure, grants, and many other career
advancement opportunities and decisions. Therefore, the ability for a reviewer to
quickly recognize your co-first author publications and distinguish these
publications from middle author ones may very well influence their decisions.

Can there be
multiple first
authors?

My first authorship is being turned
into co-first authorship,
what can I do?
I am currently submitting a paper for Journal XXXX. I worked on this project for the last four years
and was the only one working on this project. I had everything going very well. In order to get the
crystallization, I gave the plasmid construct to another laboratory which has expertise in
crystallization. Fortunately, they got the crystals.
After the crystallization got successful, one researcher (say, A) from their lab came to my lab
and my professor told me to teach him all the methods. I happily agreed to do so. After A went back
to his lab, I got the draft of the paper from my professor, where, my name appeared as first co-
author! I almost fainted. There were 20 figures in the paper. 13 were contributed by me, 4 by A and
rest by 2 other people. The paper was mostly about my work. But in the contribution section, my
prof and the prof of A mentioned that I and A had equal contribution. In fact it is mentioned that A
was solely contributor of crystals and he equally contributed in all other results.
I discussed this issue with my prof, but he tells that he is getting pressure from A's prof to make A
the first author. And my prof does not want to estrange relationship with A's prof. I am heart-broken
and I don't know what to do. Please suggest me what to do.
Edit 2021: It has been quite some time since I posted this question. I accepted the authorship as
recommended by my advisor. Now I feel mature and realize that maintaining a cordial relationship
with one's advisor and colleagues is more important than anything else. If one is capable enough,
s/he will get more opportunities to prove their worth.
Assignment!
https://academia.stackexchange.com/

Multi co-first authors and
correspondence authors

Authors Confidentiality
Authors should treat all
communication with the
Journal as confidential which
includes correspondence with
direct representatives from the
Journal such as Editors-in-
Chief and/or Handling Editors
and reviewers’ reports unless
explicit consent has been
received to share information.
Editors, authors and reviewers are required to keep confidential all details of
the editorial and peer review process on submitted manuscripts. Unless
otherwise declared as a part of open peer review, the peer review process is
confidential and conducted anonymously; identities of reviewers are not released.

Equal contributions

Consortium/Group and
Collaborative Authors
A collective of authors can be listed
as a consortium. If necessary,
individual authors can be listed in
both the main author list and as a
member of a consortium.
All authors within a consortium
must be listed at the end of the
paper. If it is necessary to include a
list of consortium members that did
not directly contribute to the paper,
this list can be placed in the
Supplementary Information.
To facilitate submission of
manuscripts with large author lists,
please consult the journal editor
before submission.
Example: John Smith, Barbara Smith and The Collaborative Working Group.

Non-Author Contributors
Contributors who meet fewer than
all 4 of the above criteria for
authorship should not be listed as
authors, but they should be
acknowledged.
Examples of activities that alone
(without other contributions) do not
qualify a contributor for authorship
are who provided financial,
conceptual, instrumental-technical,
moral, or editorial† assistance.
Non-author contributors should be
acknowledged, and their
contributions specified.

Guarantor author
Some journals now ask for one
author on a paper to be listed as
a guarantor.
The guarantor:
(1) accepts official responsibility for
the overall integrity of the
manuscript (including ethics, data
handling, reporting of results, and
study conduct)
(2) does not act as the primary
correspondent for the manuscript
(3) ensures all statements in the
manuscript are true to his
knowledge
The guarantor can be the same as the corresponding
author, or can be another of the authors. It is often
recommended that the Principal Investigator or Senior
Researcher on a manuscript act as the guarantor as they
will be responsible for the study supervision already;
however, this is not explicitly required.

Order of Authors
The order of authors in the
byline is a collective decision
of the authors or study group.
Disagreements about author
order should be resolved by
the authors before the article
is submitted for publication.
Disputes that arise after
submission could delay or
prevent publication. Authors
should not expect editors to
become embroiled in
disputes among authors over
name placement

Number of authors
There are no rules about this.

Changes to authorship
• Authors are strongly advised to ensure the correct
author group, the Corresponding Author, and the
order of authors at submission. Changes of
authorship by adding or deleting authors, and/or
changes in Corresponding Author, and/or changes
in the sequence of authors are not accepted after
acceptance of a manuscript.
– ! Please note that author names will be published exactly as
they appear on the accepted submission!
– Please make sure that the names of all authors are present
and correctly spelled, and that addresses and affiliations are
current.
• Adding and/or deleting authors at revision stage
are generally not permitted, but in some cases it
may be warranted. Reasons for these changes in
authorship should be explained. Approval of the
change during revision is at the discretion of the
Editor-in-Chief. Please note that journals may have
individual policies on adding and/or deleting
authors during revision stage.

Changes in authorship: Removal of author
COPE's guidance– before publication
Itismostimportantto
checkwiththeauthor(s)
whosename(s)is/arebeing
removedfromthepaper
andgettheiragreementin
writing.

Author contributions
statement
• CRediT (Contributor Roles
Taxonomy) :CRediT offers authors the opportunity to
share an accurate and detailed description of their diverse
contributions to the published work.
– The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring
that the descriptions are accurate and agreed by all
authors.
– The role(s) of all authors should be listed, using the
relevant above categories.
– Authors may have contributed in multiple roles.
– CRediT in no way changes the journal’s criteria to
qualify for authorship.
• CRediT statements should be provided during
the submission process and will appear above
the acknowledgement section of the published
paper as shown further below.
Sample statement: All authors
contributed to the study
conception and design.
Material preparation, data
collection and analysis were
performed by [full name], [full
name] and [full name]. The
first draft of the manuscript
was written by [full name] and
all authors commented on
previous versions of the
manuscript. All authors read
and approved the final
manuscript.
PleasechecktheInstructionsforAuthorsoftheJournalthatyouaresubmittingtoforspecific
instructionsregardingcontributionstatements.

CRediT
(Contributor Roles Taxonomy)
https://www.elsevier.com/authors/policies-and-guidelines/credit-author-statement

Sample CRediT author statement
Aboul Ella: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software Mohamed
Khaled: Data curation, Writing- Original draft preparation. XXXX:
Visualization, Investigation. YYYYY: Supervision.: TTTTT: Software,
Validation.: FFFFF: Writing- Reviewing and Editing,

Affiliation
An institution that pays
the authors for his
work. This may include
current visiting positions,
courtesy appointments
and emeritus status. This
is basically the
institution(s) one would
put under one's name in
a publication
The primary affiliation for each author should be
the institution where the majority of their work
was done. If an author has subsequently moved,
the current address may additionally be stated.
Addresses will not be updated or changed after
publication of the article.
Q: Which of the two affiliations I have should I
prioritize in my manuscript?

Can I publish without
affiliation?
• Yes,definitelyyoucanpublish
paperswithoutaninstitution
name.Youcanputyourhome
address.Generally,journalsasked
affiliationfromtheauthorsto
confirmtheavailabilityof
authorsifanyonewantsto
contactyou.

Author identification
Authors are strongly
recommended to use
their ORCID ID when
submitting an article for
consideration or acquire
an ORCID ID via the
submission process.
YourWebofScienceResearcherIDisauniqueidentifierforresearchers onPublons,
WebofScience,andInCites.YourpersonalResearcherIDisshownatthetop-rightof
mostpagesonPublons,includingyourprofileandyourprivatedashboard.

Citations
• Any statement in the manuscript that
relies on external sources of
information
– (i.e. not the authors' own new ideas or
findings or general knowledge) should use a
citation.
• Authors should avoid citing derivations
of original work.
– For example, they should cite the original
work rather than a review article that cites an
original work.
• Authors should ensure that their
citations are accurate
– they should ensure the citation supports the
statement made in their manuscript and
should not misrepresent another work by
citing it if it does not support the point the
authors wish to make
• Authors should not cite sources
that they have not read.
• Authors should not preferentially
cite their own or their friends’,
peers’, or institution’s publications.
• Authors should avoid citing work
solely from one country.
• Authors should not use an
excessive number of citations to
support one point.
• Ideally, authors should cite
sources that have undergone peer
review where possible.
• Authors should not cite
advertisements or advertorial
material.

Permissions
• Authors frequently wish to reuse previously
published images and other copyrighted material.
It is the author’s responsibility to follow journal
or publisher guidelines to reuse any copyrighted
material and provide proper attribution. This
includes the author’s own work if the copyright
was ever transferred to a publisher or journal.
Authors should contact the journal or publisher of
the source material or consult the “permissions”
information that can be found on many of their
web sites. Permission should be granted in
writing and the authors should retain this
documentation. The editor may request a copy of
this notification as well.

Appeals and Complaints
1. Complaint about
scientific content, e.g. an
appeal against rejection
2. Complaint about
publication ethics, e.g.,
researcher's author's, or
reviewer's conduct
3. Complaint about
processes, e.g. time
taken to review
The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor
considers the authors’ argument,
the reviewer reports and decides
whether
– The decision to reject should stand;
– Another independent opinion is
required
– The appeal should be considered.
The complainant is informed of the
decision with an explanation if
appropriate. Decisions on appeals are
final and new submissions take priority
over appeals.

Q: WHICH OF MY AFFILIATIONS
SHOULD I PRIORITIZE IN MY
MANUSCRIPT?
Author affiliations are usually based on the
institutions/universities where the author is currently affiliated.
If the journal does not allow more than one affiliation, it is best
to cite the permanent affiliation. That is, in your case, you must
add University A as an affiliation and acknowledge the support
received from University B in the Acknowledgements section.
This is because University A is your permanent affiliation, while
University B is a temporary affiliation. It is always advisable to
provide affiliation of your parent or permanent institution.
More
than
one
affiliation

Who should be held accountable for
research misconduct – first authors or
last authors?
Some academics believe that the first author of a paper
must be held responsible for any misconduct in the
research. Their belief is supported by a recent paper titled
‘Scientific misconduct and accountability in teams’
published in Plos One, which concluded that the first
authors of research papers are more likely to be
responsible for research misconduct.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0215962
However, different opinions are held by different groups in academia. The
guidelines provided by some scientific societies like the International Committee
of Medical Editors (ICMJE) and the Council of Science Editors
(CSE) recommend that researchers should be held accountable only for their
contribution in the research. Contrastingly, some scholarly institutions like
the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and All European Academies
(ALLEA) suggest that all researchers should be investigated if evidence of
malpractice is discovered in their research.

Unaware authors
• Thisisaformofaffiliation-relatedmisconduct
inwhichareal,existingauthorisfalsely
includedonapaper,withouttellinghimor
her.Forexampleanauthoratawell-known
institutionmightbeaddedtoapapertomake
itlookbetter.Iffakeemailaddressesareused,
ajournalmightunknowinglydirectall
correspondencebacktothecheatingauthor.
Persons whose name was added as an author on a paper, but
who do not know about this.

Fake authors
non-existing authors whose names
might be added to papers.
Can authors use fake
names?
Yes, an author can legally use a pen
name or pseudonym to publish their
intellectual property. Pen names are
legal, as long as you have
purchased the rights to your pen
name, and have copyrighted your
name. An author of a copyrighted
work is allowed to use a pseudonym
or a pen name.

How to prevent false
affiliations or fake
authors?

Guest Authorship
Guestauthorshiphasbeendefinedas
authorshipbasedsolelyonanexpectation
thatinclusionofaparticularnamewill
improvethechancesthatthestudywillbe
publishedorincreasetheperceivedstatusof
thepublication.The“guest”authormakes
nodiscerniblecontributionstothestudy,so
thispersonmeetsnoneofthecriteriafor
authorship.

Multiple Submissions
• If authors want to submit their article to another
journal while it is under consideration
elsewhere, then they must send formal
notification to the editor of the journal in which
it is under consideration, requesting that their
study be withdrawn from further consideration.
All coauthors must agree to the request for
withdrawal and this agreement must be made
clear to the editor of the journal with which the
study is under consideration. Authors should
request formal acknowledgment from the
journal to the effect that the editors understand
the manuscript has been withdrawn from future
consideration. On receipt of notification from the
journal acknowledging the withdrawal, the
authors may submit their manuscript elsewhere.
They should retain a copy of the notification.
itisnotacceptableforauthorsto
submitthereportofastudytoseveral
journalsatthesametime,includinga
manuscriptundergoingpeerreviewthat
hasnotbeenformallyrejectedbythe
originaljournaltowhichthe
manuscriptwassubmitted.
Authorswhodonotfollowthis
standardmayfindthateditorsreject
theirpapersasaviolationofpolicy.In
addition,thispracticecanbeaviolation
ofcopyright.

Data Sharing
Datasharingisthepracticeofmakingdataused
forscholarlyresearchavailabletoother
investigators.Authorsshouldbeawareoftheir
datasharingresponsibilitiesimposedbytheir
fundingagencies..Thegoalofthispolicyisto
promotereproducibilityandavailabilityof
underlyingdatasets.Atthebeginning ofastudy
theauthorsshouldconsiderwheretheywill
submittheirdataandshouldconsiderthe
journalstheymaywanttosubmittheirstudy
andreviewthedatasharingpoliciesforeach
journal.

Data transparency
• All authors are requested to
make sure that all data and
materials as well as software
application or custom code
support their published claims
and comply with field
standards.
– Scientific results are only as strong as they are
reproducible, so being able to identify and use
research data is vital to building knowledge. To help
make all scientific data more transparent, a number
of Elsevier journals encourage their authors to
state the availability of their data. With the data
statement, authors can be transparent about the
data they used in an article and make a statement
about its availability together with their published
article.
• Benefits for authors and
readers:
– Increases transparency
– Allows compliance with data
policies .
– Encourages good scientific
practice and encourages trust
Sharing research data: As a researcher,
you are increasingly encouraged, or even
mandated, to make your research data available,
accessible, discoverable and usable.
This statement allows you to clearly
explain the data you’ve used in the article
and the reasons why it might not be
available.

Why should I share my research
data?
You get credit for the work you've done
Leads to more citations!
Can boost your number of publications
Increases your exposure and may lead to
new collaborations
Publishing a research
elements article
Uploading your data to a
repository like Mendeley Data
How
you
benefit
How do I share my
research data?

Human Subjects
Research
Alljournalsshouldrequireformal
affirmationthathumansubject’sresearch
onwhichasubmissionisbasedwas
approvedbyaninstitutionalreviewboard
(IRB).
Theresearchersmusthaveconductedthe
studyaccordingtotheapprovedprotocol
andacceptableresearchstandards,
includinghavingobtainedinformed
consentofstudysubjects..

Animal Research
Alljournalsshouldrequire
formalaffirmationthatany
researchinvolvinganimals
wasapprovedbyananimal
careandusecommitteeand
wasconductedaccordingto
theapprovedprotocoland
acceptableresearch standards
foranimalexperimentation

How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for
new researchers
One of the main tasks of COPE’s education committee is to reduce unethical behavior.
• Listing the authors tells readers who did the
work and should ensure that the right people
get the credit, and take responsibility, for the
research.
• How to reduce the incidence of authorship
problems
• Preventing a problem is often better than
solving it
– Encourage a culture of ethical authorship
– ) Start discussing authorship when you plan your
research
– ) Decide authorship before you start each article
• Authorship credit should
be based only on:
– (1) substantial contributions to
conception and design, or
acquisition of data, or analysis
and interpretation of data;
– (2) drafting the article or revising it
critically for important intellectual
content; and
– (3) final approval of the version to
be published

Authorship for Sale
Someinstanceshavebeenreportedinwhich
non-authorshaveattemptedtobuy
authorshipfromanauthorofapaper,often
afterthepaperhasbeeninvitedforrevision
orprovisionallyaccepted.
Editorsshouldbeawareofchangesmadein
theauthorbylineduringthereviewprocess.
Ifachangeisrequested,thecorresponding
authorofthepapershouldprovidean
explanationfortherequest,andallauthors
onapapershouldapproveanyauthor
changes.

Deceased or
incapacitated
authors
• For cases in which a co-author dies or is
incapacitated during the writing, submission, or
peer-review process, and the co-authors feel it is
appropriate to include the author, co-authors should
obtain approval from a (legal) representative which could
be a direct relative.
– In the case of death or incapacitation of an
author during the manuscript submission and
review or publication process, a family
member, an individual with power of attorney,
or the corresponding author can confirm that
the deceased or incapacitated person should
be listed as an author. In this event, the
corresponding author can forward
correspondence from the individual
representing the deceased author and can
provide information on the deceased or
incapacitated author’s contributions.
Designation that an author is deceased can
be made in the Acknowledgment or Article
Information section of the manuscript/article

Judge and a contestant on
dancing with the stars
Conflict Of
Interest
‫المصالح‬ ‫تضارب‬
‫المصالح‬ ‫تضارب‬
https://cayuse.com/blog/conflict-of-interest-disclosure/

Competing interests
Competing interests are defined as
financial and non-financial interests
that could directly undermine, or be
perceived to undermine the objectivity,
integrity and value of a publication,
through a potential influence on the
judgments and actions of authors with
regard to objective data presentation,
analysis and interpretation.
interests of transparency
The corresponding author is
responsible for providing a
declaration on behalf of all
authors.
The authors declare the following competing interests:
The authors declare no competing interests.

Competing Interests
Non-financial interests
• Authors are requested to disclose
interests that go beyond financial
interests that could impart bias on
the work submitted for publication
such as professional interests,
personal relationships or personal
beliefs.
• Examples include, but are not
limited to:
– position on editorial board,
– advisory board or
– board of directors or
– other type of management
relationships; writing and/or consulting
for educational purposes; expert
witness; mentoring relations; and so
forth.

Competing Interests
financial interests
Financial interests: Author A has received
research support from Company A. Author
B has received a speaker honorarium from
Company Wand owns stock in Company
X. Author C is consultant to company Y.
Non-financial interests: Author C is an
unpaid member of committee Z.
Financial interests: The authors declare
they have no financial interests.
Non-financial interests: Author A is on
the board of directors of Y and receives no
compensation as member of the board of
directors.
Financial interests: Stocks or shares in companies (including holdings of spouse
and/or children) that may gain or lose financially through publication of this
manuscript; consultation fees or other forms of remuneration from organizations
that may gain or lose financially;
Financial interests: Author A received a speaking fee from Y for Z. Author
B receives a salary from association X. X where s/he is the Executive
Director.
Non-financial interests: none.
Statement

Why does Conflict of Interest
(COI) disclosure matter?
Compliance
Credibility
is
at
stake
Criminal
charges
Fines
or
loss
of
funding
Investigation

Why does Conflict of Interest
(COI) disclosure matter?
Compliance: Researchers have to
demonstrate that they adhere to applicable
regulations that were designed to protect
intellectual integrity and accuracy,
Credibility is at stake: Research should
be as objective as possible, not only to
uphold high ethical standards, but to
maintain public trust. The reputation of the
researcher and institution could be
irreparably ruined through a public
relations fiasco.
Fines or loss of funding
Failure to disclose can result in
fines from thousands to millions
of dollars, and grants can be
suspended.
Criminal charges
Inability to publish: Researchers
found to be in noncompliance
may be barred from submitting
work to research journals for a
period of time.
Investigation

Types of conflicts
of interest
• A relationship could be a conflict of
interest if:
– Your spouse, relative, or household
member works for an “external entity”
(e.g., research sponsor or publicly
traded company)
– Certain study results could advance
your career or lead to a promotion
– You serve on a company’s board
– You volunteer for an organization
– A company gives you a gift or pays for
equipment
– You are a consultant or lecturer for a
company
– You provide expert legal testimony (on
behalf of a company or not)
• Financial Conflict of
interest
– The most common conflicts
of interest are financial
relationships, including
direct conflict of interest,
such as employment, stock
ownership, grants, etc. This
type of conflict includes the
financial benefits of an
individual that can help
him/her in the future.

How to Cope with Conflict
of Interest?
Many reviewers, researchers,
authors, face these kinds of
conflicts while reviewing different
types of manuscripts or
researches. But what is the
solution if the conflict becomes
apparent to the researcher? Is it
correct to ignore these
conflicts?
The answer to these questions is that one
should never ignore it and should consider
disclosing it. It is ethical to report the conflict of
interest to make sure that the quality of the
research in question must not get compromised.
A researcher must immediately report these
conflicts when they become apparent.

Disclosures and
declarations
• All authors are requested to include information regarding sources of funding, financial or
non-financial interests, study-specific approval by the appropriate ethics committee for
research involving humans and/or animals, informed consent if the research involved
human participants, and a statement on welfare of animals if the research involved
animals (as appropriate).
Studies
with
human
subjects

Disclosures and
declarations
• All authors are requested to include information regarding sources of funding, financial or
non-financial interests, study-specific approval by the appropriate ethics committee for
research involving humans and/or animals, informed consent if the research involved
human participants, and a statement on welfare of animals if the research involved
animals (as appropriate).

Disclosures and
declarations
• All authors are requested to include
information regarding sources of funding,
financial or non-financial interests, study-
specific approval by the appropriate ethics
committee for research involving humans
and/or animals, informed consent if the
research involved human participants, and
a statement on welfare of animals if the
research involved animals (as appropriate).
Studies
that
do
not
contain
studie
s
with
human
or
animal
subjects

Corrections and Retractions
• If there is suspicion of misbehavior or
alleged fraud, the journals and/or
Publisher will carry out an investigation
following COPE guidelines. If, after an
investigation, there are valid concerns,
the authors concerned will be contacted
under their given email address and
given an opportunity to address the
issue. Depending on the situation, this
may result in the journal and/or
Publisher’s implementation of the
following measures,
• If the manuscript is still under
consideration, it may be rejected
and returned to the author.
• If the article has already been
published online, depending on
the nature and severity of the
infraction:
– an erratum/correction may be placed
with the article.
– an editor’s note or editorial expression
of concern may be placed with the
article.
– or, in severe cases, retraction of the
article may occur.

Removal of Published Content
• Content is defamatory, infringes a
third party’s intellectual property
right, right to privacy, or other legal
right
• A court or government order has
been issued
• Content would pose an immediate
and serious risk to health
Removal may be temporary or
permanent. Bibliographic metadata
(e.g. title and authors) will be retained,
and will be accompanied by a
statement explaining why the content
has been removed
Webinar on Editorial Policies: Journals and Proceedings by
Professor Aboul Ella Hassanien

Peer Review Policy,
Process and Guidance
All research articles, and most other article types, published
in journals/proceedings undergo peer review. This usually involves review by at
least two independent, expert peer reviewers. Individual journals may differ in
their peer review processes (e.g. open or blinded);

Peer review policy
• Editor(s) are expected to obtain a minimum of two peer
reviewers for manuscripts reporting primary research or
secondary analysis of Editor(s) may wish to make a decision to
publish based on one peer review report. primary research.
• Editor(s) are expected to independently verify the contact
details of reviewers suggested by authors or other third parties.
Institutional email addresses should be used to invite peer
reviewers wherever possible. Each manuscript should be
reviewed by at least one reviewer who was not suggested by the
author.
• Manuscripts that do not report primary research or secondary
analysis of primary research, such as Editorials, Book Reviews,
Commentaries or Opinion articles, may be accepted without
peer review.
Peer reviewer selection is critical
to the publication process. It is
based on many factors,
including expertise, reputation,
specific recommendations,
conflict of interest and previous
performance. Speed,
thoroughness, sound reasoning
and collegiality are highly
desirable.

Peer reviewer diversity
Journals strive for
diverse demographic
representation within
peer reviewer database.
Authors are strongly
encouraged to consider
gender, race and
geography when
recommending peer
reviewers

Peer reviewer misconduct
Providing false or
misleading information—for
example, identity theft and
suggesting fake peer-
reviewers—will result in
rejection of the manuscript,
further investigation in line
with misconduct policy,
and notification to the
authors’
institutions/employers.
journals are members of
the Committee on
Publication Ethics (COPE)

Peer review models
(A) Open peer review
(B) Transparent peer review
If the manuscript is published,
the peer review reports
appear online alongside the
article. Names of peer
reviewers are not published.
(C) Blinded peer review
The identity of the author and the
reviewer is known by all
participants, during or after the
review process.
If the manuscript is published,
reports with peer reviewer names
are published online alongside the
article
There should not be direct
correspondence between authors
and peer reviewers;
communication is mediated by the
Editor.
Most journals use a
single-blind peer review
process; that is, author
identities are known to
peer reviewers, but peer
reviewers identities are
not revealed to the
authors. In double-blind
peer review, identities of
neither authors nor peer
reviewers are disclosed;
peer
(D) Collaborative
Two or more reviewers
work together to submit
a unified report. OR
Author revises
manuscript under the
supervision of one or
more reviewers.
Q. Did you find that certain models of peer review were more effective than others in preventing
retractions, and why do you think this is the case?

review procedures that use ‘anticipated impact’ or ‘novelty’ as a selection
criterion are associated with significantly more retractions.
journals using plagiarism or statistics scanners are associated with
fewer retractions compared to journals
performing review without digital tools such as similarity scanners.
We also found fewer retractions in journals using the pre-
submission (Registered Reports) review model. However, we must
add that this is a recent initiative that is still growing and therefore
the sample size is relatively small.
Blinded author identities (the double or triple blind review
models) are associated with significantly fewer retractions as
compared to review procedures in which author identities are
disclosed
Q. Did you find that certain models of peer review were more effective than others in preventing
retractions, and why do you think this is the case?

Peer reviewer
recognition
Journals is committed to recognizing
the invaluable service performed by our
dedicated peer reviewers. As part of our
appreciation program, we offer our peer
reviewers the opportunity to credit
their ORCID and Publons (where
available) profiles with verified peer
review data transmitted directly from
the submission system at the time of
report submission.

What are the threats right
now to the trustworthiness of
published research, and how
do you think peer review can
help combat these?
Any source of bias within the peer review system has the potential to erode the
credibility, validity and trustworthiness of scientific findings. For example, the field
of biomedical science is littered with procedural flaws in peer review processes.
Flaws in the peer review system have the potential to affect the quality of a
review paper, which may have life or death consequences in the clinical arena.
Peer review systems can only be enhanced through better peer review.

Intellectual property rights
• Intellectual property rights are
legal rights that protect
innovations and/or inventions
resulting from intellectual activity
in the industrial, scientific,
literary and artistic fields.
• Intellectual property rights are the
rights given to persons over
the creations of their minds.
They usually give the creator an
exclusive right over the use of
his/her creation for a certain
period of time.

Copyright
What rights does the owner control?
• Rights to:
– make copies of the work distribute
– copies of the work per form the
work publicly
– display the work publicly
– make derivative works including
making modifications
• Does author or publisher own
copyright?
– Usually, the author of the creative work
is the owner of the copyright. But in the
publishing industry, the owner of the
copyright may be the publishing
company due to an agreement
between the author and the publisher.
Inmostcountriesoftheworld,authors
enjoyprotectionoftheirintellectual
propertythatappearsinbooks,journal
articlesandpartsthereof,suchas
illustrations,plans,tablesandanimations.
Protectedworksincludeliteraryand
scientificworks,suchaswritings,speeches
andcomputerprograms.Onlypersonal
intellectualcreationsareprotected.
The person who writes one of the aforementioned works is defined as the
creator/author. Co-authorship applies if two or more persons create a work
together.

Can a publisher steal your
work?
Many writers are
concerned that
submitting their book to
publishers or agents
runs a risk – a risk that
their work might be
stolen (gasp!). ... Firstly,
reputable publishers and
agents are not in the
business of 'stealing'
work.

Image integrity and
standards
Authors must also take care to
avoid misrepresentation during
data acquisition. Please list all
image acquisition tools and
image processing software
packages used and document
key image-gathering settings
and processing manipulations
in the Methods.
Images gathered at different times or from
different locations should not be combined
into a single image, unless it is stated that the
resultant image is a product of time-averaged
data or a time-lapse sequence.
The use of touch-up tools, such as cloning and
healing tools in Photoshop, or any feature that
deliberately obscures manipulations, is unacceptable.
Processing(suchaschanging brightnessandcontrast)isappropriateonlywhenitisappliedequallyacross
theentireimageandisappliedequallytocontrols.Contrastshouldnotbeadjustedsothatdatadisappear.
Excessivemanipulations,suchasprocessingtoemphasizeoneregionintheimageattheexpenseofothers
(forexample,throughtheuseofabiasedchoiceofthresholdsettings),isinappropriate,asisemphasizing
experimentaldatarelativetothecontrol.

Predatory Journals
Published work is not protected
Work will receive poor or no peer
review
Work could disappear, or you could
lose access if the journal is dissolved
It may be difficult for others to find
your work, and when/if it is found,
academics may be reluctant to cite it
There are documented cases in which
publishing in a predatory journal,
though inadvertently, resulted in ethics
accusations and career injury
Once work is published in a predatory
journal, it can be very difficult, if not
impossible, to have that work removed
and published elsewhere in a
reputable academic journal

References
Academic Honesty

Press and embargo
policies
Communication with the media
We strongly discourage authors and
potential authors from direct solicitation of
media coverage of material they have
submitted to Nature and the Nature
Portfolio journals.
Accepted contributions can be discussed
with the media only once the publication
date has been confirmed and no more than
a week before the publication date under
our embargo conditions.

Press and embargo
policies
Communication between scientists before publication
*We support open communications
between researchers whether on a
recognised community preprint server or
preprint commenting platforms, through
discussions at research meetings or online
collaborative sites such as wikis or the
author's blog. Neither conference
presentations nor posting on recognized
preprint servers constitute prior publication.
*https://www.nature.com/nature-portfolio/editorial-policies/press-and-embargo-
policies#communication-between-scientists

Webinar on editorial policies

Webinar on editorial policies

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Webinar on editorial policies

Similar to Webinar on editorial policies (20)

More from Aboul Ella Hassanien

More from Aboul Ella Hassanien (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Webinar on editorial policies

Editor's Notes