1

Violation of Publication Ethics, Authorship and

contributor ship

Program Ph.D Course work

Subject Research and Publication Ethics (RPE)
Subject Code PHD2002

PROF DR PRAVIN P RATHOD, Ph.D.

PROFESSOR,
GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING COLLEGE - BHUJ
Violation of Publication Ethics
2

 Publication ethics are violated by all those activities which threaten the

integrity of the research publication process.

 These include authors dispute, fake affiliations, conflicts of interest, dual

submissions, duplicate publication, plagiarism, fabrication and falsification.

 It affects the scientific community, journal editors, peer reviewers but the

ultimate victims are the end readers or recipients.

Violation of Publication Ethics
3

 Data fabrication and falsification: Data fabrication means the researcher did

not actually do the study but made up data. Data falsification means the

researcher did the experiment, but then changed some of the data. Both of

these practices make people distrust scientists. If the public is mistrustful of

science, then it will be less willing to provide funding support.

 Plagiarism: In an instructional setting, plagiarism occurs when a writer

deliberately uses someone else’s language, ideas, or other original material

without acknowledging its source.

Violation of Publication Ethics
4

Plagiarism have many forms as :

 Stealing material from another source and passing it off as their own e.g.
(a) buying a paper from a research service, essay bank or term paper mill
(either pre-written or specially written)
(b) copying a whole paper from a source text without proper
acknowledgement,
(c) submitting another student’s work, with or without that student’s
knowledge (e.g. by copying a computer disk).
 Submitting a paper written by someone else (e.g. a peer or relative) and passing
it off as their own.

 Paraphrasing material from one or more source texts without supplying

appropriate documentation
Violation of Publication Ethics
5

 Multiple submissions of a paper: It is unethical to submit the same

manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. This is also a waste of
time for editors and peer reviewers and can give rise to prejudices at the
reputation of journals if published in more than one.

 Redundant publications (or ‘salami’ publications): This means publishing

many very similar manuscripts based on the same experiment. It can make
readers less likely to pay attention to your manuscripts.

 Improper author contribution or attribution: All listed authors must have

made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and
approved all its claims. Don’t forget to list everyone who made a significant
scientific contribution.
Violation of Publication Ethics
6

 With the increasing number of journals, the number of submitted manuscripts

is also on the rise. Similarly increased number of violations of publication ethics
are occurring and being reported. Consequently a significant number of articles
are retracted due to research misconduct.

 A study showed that 67.4% of retractions were due to misconduct as opposed

to 21.3% which were due to error. Among the misconduct, fraud comprised
43.4%, duplicate publication 14.2% and plagiarism in 9.8% of retracted
manuscripts .

 Another report shows plagiarism in 17% and multiple submissions in 1.97% of

manuscripts.
Violation of Publication Ethics
7

 If a manuscript is submitted simultaneously to 02 or more journals it is called

dual submission. The editors are unable to detect the under process dual
submissions.

 In order to publish their manuscripts early, the authors use these kinds of
unethical tactics and deceits. The authors when came to know that their
manuscript are accepted by journal X, they withdraw it from journal Y. On top
of that, they try to appear innocent and gave the reason that the processing
time of journal Y is quite long and it’s difficult for them to wait that much
longer. To further complicate the matters, if unknowingly both the journals
published that same article, it will result in research inflation without adding
anything substantial to the existing scientific knowledge.
Violation of Publication Ethics
8

 The other serious ethical issue is that of plagiarism. It is defined as the stealing

or theft of another person’s words, ideas or results and without citation of

reference source.

 It is becoming more prevalent due to the “publish or perish” environment

leading to increased publication demands. Self-plagiarism or salami slicing is

also not acceptable as it is considered manipulative. In this, one research article

is broken into multiple different manuscripts but sharing the same

methodology, hypotheses or patient population. It will lead to unfairly skewing

of research database and enhanced citation record of authors.

Case Example
9
Authorship
10

 Naming authors on a scientific paper ensures that the appropriate individuals

get credit, and are accountable, for the research. Deliberately misrepresenting a
scientist's relationship to their work is considered to be a form of misconduct
that undermines confidence in the reporting of the work itself.

 While there is no universal definition of authorship, an “author” is generally

considered to be an individual who has made a significant intellectual
contribution to the study.

 According to the guidelines for authorship established by the International

Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), "All persons designated as
authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be
listed."
Authorship
11

Following Four criteria must all be met to be credited as an author:

 Substantial contribution to the study conception and design, data acquisition,

analysis, and interpretation.

 Drafting or revising the article for intellectual content.

 Approval of the final version.

 Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work related to the accuracy

or integrity of any part of the work.

Authorship
12

Corresponding Author
 A corresponding author is the individual who, when working on a paper with
multiple authors, takes primary responsibility for communicating with the
journal you intend to publish in. They communicate with the journal during the
manuscript submission, peer review and eventual publication process while
ensuring all the journal's administrative requirements are adhered to. The
corresponding author usually makes themselves available throughout the
process to respond to editorial queries. They should also be available after
publication to respond to critiques of the work, any questions that arise and to
co-operate with requests for additional data or information.
Authorship
13

What does a ‘corresponding author’ do?

 Responsible for the manuscript as it moves through the entire publication
process.

 The "time keeper" during each phase of the publication process.

 The primary contact between the journal and all the other authors of the paper.

 Responsible for ensuring that all authors have reviewed and approved the final
version of the manuscript prior to submission.

 The person who uploads the manuscript to the online submission site, or sends
it to the journal for peer review.

 Responsible for distributing communications from the journal.

Authorship
14

The following are some general guidelines, which may vary from field to field:

 The order of authorship should be "a joint decision of the co-authors".

 Individuals who are involved in a study but don't satisfy the journal's criteria
for authorship, should be listed as "Contributors" or "Acknowledged
Individuals". Examples include: assisting the research by providing advice,
providing research space, departmental oversight, and obtaining financial
support.

 For large, multi-center trials, the list of clinicians and centers is typically
published, along with a statement of the individual contributions made. Some
groups list authors alphabetically, sometimes with a note to explain that all
authors made equal contributions to the study and the publication.
Authorship
15

Three types of authorship are considered unacceptable:

 "Ghost" authors, who contribute substantially but are not

acknowledged (often paid by commercial sponsors).

 "Guest" authors, who make no significant contributions, but are listed to help

increase the chances of publication.

 "Gift" authors, whose contribution is based solely on a weak affiliation with a

study.
Contributor ship
16

Contributing to research can broadly be classified into the following categories:

 Intellectual (ideas, writing)

 Practical (conducting research, data analysis)

 Financial (funds, experimental material)

Any individual playing a role in research is eligible to be a contributor. Contributor

ship includes authorship as well because publication ethics demands that the

contribution of each individual author should be specified when research is

submitted for publication. These should be named in the "Acknowledgments"

section of the paper.

Contributor ship
17

Contributor roles can be defined as

 Conceptualization – Ideas; formulation or evolution of overarching research
goals and aims.

 Data curation – Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), scrub

data and maintain research data for initial use and later re-use.

 Formal analysis – Application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or

other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data.

 Funding acquisition – Acquisition of the financial support for the project

leading to this publication.

 Investigation – Conducting a research and investigation process, specifically

performing the experiments, or data/evidence collection.
Contributor ship
18

 Methodology – Development or design of methodology; creation of models.

 Project administration – Management and coordination responsibility for the
research activity planning and execution.
 Resources – Provision of study materials, reagents, materials, patients,
laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources, or other
analysis tools.
 Software – Programming, software development; designing computer
programs; implementation of the computer code and supporting algorithms;
testing of existing code components.
 Validation – Verification, whether as a part of the activity or separate, of the
overall replication/reproducibility of results/experiments and other research
outputs.
 Visualization – Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published
work, specifically visualization/data presentation.
Conclusion
19

 Because of the potential for ambiguity and confused expectations, it is strongly

advised that before the research begins, a meeting take place to document how

each person will be acknowledged.

 Issues around authorship can be complex and sensitive. Early career

researchers who encounter such situations may fear they will jeopardize their

reputation and career if they speak up. Take the time to fully understand each

journal's guidelines for authorship, and industry requirements. If you find

yourself in a challenging situation that you are not sure how to handle, consult

with a trusted mentor or supervisor.

Use Case I
20

Mr. X submitted a manuscript to JPP on 15/03/13. A decision to send it for revision

was taken by JPP on 25/03/13. The author submitted the revised manuscript
which was sent back to the author again for further corrections as the suggestions
of the editorial board were not complied with. But the author never responded
even after sending many reminders. Meanwhile one of the JPP editorial staff
accidentally identified the article with the same title published in “Journal Y” by
the same author. The manuscript was submitted to the above journal on 20/01/13.
When the author was questioned he responded after a month by simply sending a
withdrawal request.

What would be your opinion amounted to violation of publication ethics in this

case, and the course of action by the Editor ?
Use Case II
21

Mr. X submitted a case report which was published in 2013. After the publication
of the article, one of the readers pointed out that it was plagiarized and the data
were copied from a previously published article. When the author was queried it
was revealed that the work was not carried out in the hospital where he was
affiliated but in the one where he worked previously. But this fact was not
mentioned in the article. The article was retracted because of plagiarism and
inappropriate author affiliation.

What would be your opinion in this case, and the course of action by the Editor ?
Use Case III
22

A PhD student has done the thesis under the guidance of associate professor in the

department. They conceived the study, wrote the protocol, did the research, and

wrote the manuscript. The head of the department helped by permitting the

research and providing space and equipment. A senior professor got the funding

for the project. Another PhD student helped in the collection of data for 3 months

when the researcher was on maternity leave.

According to you, Who will all be authors and contributors in the manuscript ?
Many Thanks !