Download to read offline
Uploaded byC0pe
September 20, 2021, George Washington University: Ethics class
Dr. Daniel Kulp gave a presentation on publication ethics and trends at George Washington University. He discussed his background and role as COPE Chair at the American Chemical Society. He outlined COPE's core practices and resources around issues like peer review, image manipulation, AI, preprints, and translated guidance. The presentation included case studies on DOIs, plagiarism in book chapters, social media surveys, unresponsive authors, and papers published without permission. Kulp emphasized COPE's role in establishing standards and providing guidance on emerging topics in publication ethics.
More Related Content
Similar to September 20, 2021, George Washington University: Ethics class
September 20, 2021, George Washington University: Ethics class
- 1. Publication Ethics George WashingtonUniversity September 13, 2021 Dr. Daniel T. Kulp. COPE Chair Senior Director, Editorial Development American Chemical Society
- 2. Trends and Issuesin Publication Ethics Agenda • Background on me • COPE: Who we are • Current Trends • Case Studies
- 3. Born 1964 Ph.D. fromUPenn 1992 B.S. from MIT 1986 Joined APS 1996 Editorial Director 2007 Joined ACS 2020 COPE Chair 2021
- 4. COPE TRUSTEES ANDCOUNCIL MEMBERS
- 5. COPE CORE PRACTICES Policiesand core practices required to reach the highest standards in publication ethics: Ethical oversight Intellectual property Journal management Peer review processes Allegations of misconduct Authorship and contributorship Complaints and appeals Conflicts of interest/ Competing interests Data and reproducibility Post-publication discussions and corrections
- 6.
- 7. COPE RESOURCES Peer review •Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers • What to consider when asked to peer review a manuscript • What to do if you suspect peer review manipulation
- 8. COPE RESOURCES Image manipulation •Image manipulation flowchart. Artificial intelligence (AI) • AI in decision making discussion document coming soon. • 'Trustworthy AI for the future of publishing' COPE seminar session. Recording available after the event.
- 9. COPE RESOURCES Preprints • Preprintsdiscussion document We are working on an update to this guidance which will be published soon. • Preprints and their place in the publication ethics landscape, WCRI panel discussion.
- 10. COPE RESOURCES Translated resources •COPE is working towards translating more resources to allow communication with a wider audience.
- 11.
- 12. COPE Seminar 2021 •Trustworthy AI for the future of publishing • Ethical practice in research data publication – challenges, lessons, and opportunities • Authorship for sale – how do we deal with the growing problem of paper mills • Ethical authorship versus fraudulent authorship • Reducing the inadvertent spread of retracted science: taxonomy considerations • Driving diversity, equity, and inclusion to shape the future of publication ethics • How do publication ethics practices for journals apply to book publishing
- 13.
- 14. Definition of systematic manipulationof the publication process
- 15. Case Study • DOI(Digital Object Identifier) - "DOI...is related to a single resource." • Paper submitted to a preprint server and received a DOI. • Paper accepted by Journal X. Can a new DOI be assigned? Can two DOI’s be assigned to the same manuscript?
- 16. Case Study Possible Plagiarism •Whistleblower complaint that two chapters in a book, by the same authors, have significant plagiarism. • Publisher determined that unattributed text were present in both chapters. • Some text was from the authors’ own work and some from third parties. • Correction or Retraction? • What if the whistleblower is not satisfied by the correction?
- 17. Case Study Is approvalneeded for a social media survey? • An author wants to collect information from a survey on a topic of significant interest to the community. • No patient information will be collected. • The survey is not derived from an institution, rather out of the personal interest of the authors. • Does the author need institutional review board approval? • The institution initially indicated that because the study did not involve an intervention on a patient, they were not responsible for oversight of the study.
- 18. Case Study Unresponsive authorsdelaying publication • A manuscript is submitted and after peer review, accepted for publication. • Author accepted version is posted and published in PubMed as an advance article. • Production edits and sends out proofs to the authors. • The authors do not respond to multiple reminders to okay the proofs. • Final deadlines given, but still no response.
- 19. Case Study Paper publishedwithout permission or acknowledgement from institution • An author, affiliated with a research institution, had a paper published in a journal. • After publication, the institution reached out to the journal indicating that they had carried out an investigation on the author and asked the journal to publish an Erratum. • Author failed to properly acknowledge the contributions of other members of his teamor the funding source. • The author disagreed with the text and suggested a modified Erratum. • The institution disagreed stating that the author was trying to downplay the results of the investigation and the contribution by others.
- 20. THANK YOU Daniel Kulp:d_kulp@acs.org
- 21. Registered charity No1123023 Registered in England and Wales, Company No 6389120 Registered office: COPE New Kings Court, Tollgate, Chandler's Ford, Eastleigh, Hampshire, SO53 3LG, United Kingdom ©2021 Committee on Publication Ethics (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) facebook.com/publicationethics @C0PE LinkedIn