Safeguarding Research Integrity in Academic Publishing

For a small new academic journal, establishing a robust ethics policy is fundamental to upholding the integrity of the research it publishes. As the editor, you bear responsibility for all material published and must take reasonable steps to ensure its quality. Adhering to established guidelines from organizations like the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is crucial. The journal's website, serving as the public face of its ethical commitments, should transparently outline these standards and expectations for authors, reviewers, and readers.

A sound ethics policy should be comprehensive and cover several key areas, aligning with COPE's Core Practices and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

Key Components of a Sound Ethics Policy

Commitment to Core Principles: Explicitly state adherence to COPE's Core Practices and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. These principles should guide all aspects of the journal's operation. Using the COPE Journal Audit tool can help identify areas needing attention.

Clear and Accessible Guidelines: Publication ethics policies must be clearly visible on the journal's website. This includes providing clear instructions for authors outlining expectations and procedures for suspected misconduct like plagiarism or data fabrication. Reviewers also need clear guidelines on appropriate tone, language, and content, and what to do if they suspect misconduct. Links to resources like COPE Flowcharts and Retraction Guidelines can be helpful. Instructions should be unambiguous.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct: The policy must include a clearly described process for handling allegations, regardless of how they are received, including from whistleblowers. Journals must take allegations seriously, both before and after publication. Procedures should cover how to handle ethics issues, review allegations, initiate impartial and confidential investigations, and how to contact institutions and other journals. Editors or publishers made aware of allegations should follow COPE's guidance. A designated contact person for handling allegations is recommended.

Authorship and Contributorship: Clear policies defining authorship requirements and procedures for managing potential disputes are essential. Policies should encourage appropriate attribution and discourage guest and ghost authorship. This might involve requiring statements of individual contributions or using checklists. While authorship disputes alone don't typically warrant retraction if the findings are valid, the policy should explain how the journal handles them, such as publishing a correction. Clear authorship criteria should be specified in the Instructions to Authors.

Complaints and Appeals: A clearly described process for handling complaints against the journal, its staff, editorial board, or publisher is necessary. This includes complaints about editor/reviewer conduct, substantive decisions like retractions, or administrative issues. There should also be a process for author appeals against editorial decisions. Having a designated contact person for ethics inquiries and appeals is beneficial. Some journals may consider an ombudsperson.

Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests: The policy must include clear definitions of conflicts of interest and processes for handling conflicts for authors, reviewers, editors, and the journal/publisher itself, whether identified before or after publication. Reviewers should be asked to declare relevant competing interests. Editors involved in commercial decisions must declare competing interests. Editorial board members should provide a list of potential competing interests. Verification of no conflict between editors and authors should be a pre-publication check.

Data and Reproducibility: Policies on data availability should be included, encouraging the use of reporting guidelines and registration of studies where appropriate. The journal should cooperate with institutional oversight bodies for issues like alleged data fabrication and falsification. Reviewers should be asked if there is any indication of fabricated or inappropriately manipulated data. Pre-publication checks should confirm data availability and image quality.

Ethical Oversight of Research: Clear guidelines regarding the ethical conduct of research should be adopted and published. This includes policies on consent to publication (especially for medical case reports where individuals are highly identifiable), vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects, and handling confidential data. The journal must diligently review submitted work to ensure it conforms with research ethics guidelines. The policy should outline practices for informed consent, institutional oversight, prior ethics approval, and compliance with international guidelines. While editors do not always have to follow the judgment of an ethics committee, they have an independent obligation to judge whether a study is ethical. Pre-publication checks should confirm adherence to ethics for research involving humans, animals, plants, and trials.

Intellectual Property: Policies on intellectual property, including copyright and publishing licenses, must be clearly described. The policy should clarify what constitutes plagiarism and redundant/overlapping publication. Journals must ensure copyright compliance. Authors should declare previous publications and cite them to avoid copyright issues. Pre-publication checks should include running plagiarism checks and verifying revisions to reduce overlap.

Journal Management Transparency: A well-described infrastructure for ethical and efficient journal management is essential. The website should identify the publisher/owner, governing body, contact details, publication frequency, peer review model, aims and scope, and editorial board members and their affiliations. Policies on how editors/reviewers are selected and trained should be documented. The business model and revenue sources should be transparent and not influence editorial decisions. Advertising policy should be stated and kept separate from editorial decisions.

Peer Review Processes: The specific peer review model should be clearly stated on the website. Policies should cover handling conflicts of interest, appeals, and disputes that may arise in peer review. Reviewers should be asked to address ethical aspects such as prior publication, plagiarism, research ethics approval, data integrity concerns, and competing interests. Reviewers must respect confidentiality. Policies regarding editing peer reviews, including the level of editing and whether reviews are published, should be clear. Editors publishing in their own journal must have a transparent process for independent peer review.

Post-publication Discussions and Corrections: Mechanisms for correcting, revising, or retracting articles after publication are necessary. The policy should explain the circumstances for retraction. Retraction is appropriate for seriously flawed or erroneous content where findings are unreliable, such as due to major error, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or redundant publication (for the subsequent journal). A retraction notice should clearly identify the article, who is retracting it, and the objective reasons. Retracted articles should remain online and be clearly marked as retracted. Corrections may be used for smaller errors that don't invalidate the main findings. Journals must be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.

Cooperation with Research Institutions:

Effective communication and collaboration with research institutions on cases of research integrity is essential. Institutions are responsible for the conduct of their researchers and investigating allegations of misconduct, while journals are accountable for the published record. Journals should have clear public guidelines on how concerns about research integrity or allegations of misconduct should be raised and handled, including clear contact information. Journals should inform institutions if misconduct by their researchers is suspected and cooperate with investigations, providing evidence where possible. They should be ready to publish changes to published articles (corrections, expressions of concern, addenda, retractions) when provided with findings from institutional investigations. Journals generally cannot investigate or resolve authorship disputes themselves and rely on institutions to arbitrate these matters. When misconduct involves multiple journals, editors should cooperate and share information.

Developing a sound ethics policy requires careful consideration and the utilization of resources. New journals establishing their editorial office should begin with the COPE Core Practices and guidelines and use resources like the COPE Journal Audit and the Ethics Toolkit. Consistency and transparency in applying these policies are key to building trust and upholding the integrity of published research.