|
Welcome to the April issue of COPE Digest.
Over the past year, COPE has been busy evaluating what our priorities should be for the next three years. Collaboration is critical to COPE in all aspects of our work and to inform COPE’s strategy we gathered insights through a member survey, telephone interviews with people working with non-traditional publishing models, workshops with Trustees and Council Members, insights from conversations with our collaborative partnerships, and market research.
What we hear from the community is that education, guidance and support on best practice in publication ethics is seen as an important role for COPE to continue to deliver, and to extend this to publishing models which bring unique ethical challenges such as special issues and preprints. Increasing our work with universities and research institutes is also seen as integral to supporting the integrity of the publication process.
Some of the challenges that have been raised include the need for more guidance in fast moving areas in research and publishing such as AI and micro-publishing. Trust in the integrity of the publication process is also key, and more support to counter the impact of systematic manipulation of the publication process (eg. paper mills) as well as at an individual journal level would be welcomed. Additionally, we heard that cultural and regional differences in publication and research ethics need to be better supported to reduce the inequities in the process.
As we near to finalising the next strategic plan, with our final piece of work being conducted with Trustees, Council Members and the COPE team at our upcoming annual retreat in June, we can give you early insight of the four key areas that we will be focusing on over the next three years: integrity; education; collaboration; and diversity, equity, inclusivity and accessibility.
We are excited by the ambitious plans that we have for these four priorities and look forward to letting you know more after our retreat in June.
|
|
WHAT TO CONSIDER WHEN ASKED TO PEER REVIEW A MANUSCRIPT: UPDATE
The flowchart is a step by step guide to help potential peer reviewers make a decision on whether to accept or decline the invitation to peer review a manuscript.
|
|
|
New to this flowchart:
- clarification that if the reviewer has a good idea of who the likely authors are they should consider potential conflicts of interest
- that reviewers reading journal instructions for reviewers should check any guidance on the use of AI in reviewing
- a strengthened warning that not all requests to review are from legitimate journals
- that sharing reviews is a possible mentoring opportunity but must be done with the permission of the editor.
FLOWCHART >
|
|
WATCHLISTS
Ethical considerations
What are the potential benefits and harms of watchlists, and what should be put in place to reduce any risks? Dan Kulp, COPE Chair, introduces the discussion held at the March Forum.
VIDEO AND DISCUSSION >
|
|
|
TEXT RECYCLING: LIGHTNING TALK
In the second of our new series of Lightning Talks, Professor Cary Moskovitz (Director of the Text Recycling Research Project at Duke University, NC), shared the Project’s latest guidance for authors and editors on handling text recycling.
In his talk Cary focused on two areas of legal concern surrounding text recycling: copyright law and contract law, and called for publishers to create clear and explicit contractual statements on re-use. The event was chaired by COPE Council Member, Itamar Ashkenazi.
LIGHTNING TALK SUMMARY >
|
|
PUBLICATION ETHICS CASES
COPE Members only
If you have a publication ethics issue you are currently dealing with and need advice from other COPE Members, submit your case for discussion and advice at the Forum in June. For more urgent queries submit a case for advice from COPE Council Members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
COPE FORUM CASES
New cases
Three cases were brought to the March COPE Forum for discussion and advice from COPE Members:
|
|
PREPRINTS, JOURNALS AND OPENNESS: DISENTANGLING GOALS AND INCENTIVES
A commentary in Scholarly Kitchen, from the perspective of a publisher at the American Mathematics Society, describing why there is a need to shift incentives for researchers to encourage research integrity, particularly around peer review.
ARTICLE >
|
|
ACADEMIC PUBLISHING NEEDS INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE POLICIES
A survey of journal and editor policies and practices in the biological sciences reveals that only a minority of the journals published in English support linguistically inclusive policies. Though editors favoured some inclusive policies, published guidelines hardly noted these.
ARTICLE >
|
|
COUNCIL OF SCIENCE EDITORS ANNUAL MEETING
4-7 MAY
'Communicating science for a sustainable future' is the theme of this year's Council of Science Editors (CSE) Annual Meeting.
Patrick Franzen, COPE Council Member, has been invited to speak at an ethics clinic on paper mills and predatory publishers.
CSE ANNUAL MEETING >
|
|
ERION CONFERENCE
15 MAY
ERION is the Ethics and Research Integrity Officer Network within the European Association for Research Managers and Administrators (EARMA). It is an open community to discuss the practical and implementation side of research ethics and integrity.
Dan Kulp, COPE Chair, will be speaking at the conference, in Brussels, to an audience of ethics and integrity officers, and administrators .
|
|
Submitting a guest editorial or opinion piece to COPE
We welcome guest editorials and opinion articles regarding research and publication ethics from COPE members. Please read the COPE guest editorial policy before submitting your article.
|
|
COPE Digest Editors:
Itamar Ashkenazi, COPE Council Member
Trevor Lane, COPE Trustee and Council Member
Managing Editor, Sarah Gillmore, COPE Engagement & Outreach Officer
|
|
|
|
