Publication Misconduct

Publication misconduct defines as research misconduct to include the following activities:-

 fabrication: making up results or other outputs (e.g. artifacts) and presenting them as
if they were real

 falsification: manipulating research processes or changing or omitting data without

good cause

 plagiarism: using other people’s material without giving proper credit

 misrepresentation: for example, misrepresentation of data, of interests, of

qualifications or experience, or of involvement, such as inappropriate claims to
authorship or attribution of work

 breach of duty of care: breach of confidentiality such as disclosing the identity of

individuals or groups involved in research without their consent; improper conduct in
peer review such as failing to disclose conflicts of interest; or not observing legal and
ethical requirements or obligations of care

 failure to meet ethical, legal and professional obligations: for example, failure to
declare competing interests; misrepresentation of involvement or authorship;
misrepresentation of interests; breach of confidentiality; lack of informed consent;
misuse of personal data; and abuse of research subjects or materials

 Improper dealing with allegations of misconduct: failing to address possible

infringements such as attempts to cover up misconduct and reprisals against
whistleblowers.

ETHICAL ISSUES IN VARIOUS DISCIPLINES

ETHICAL ISSUES IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

They must have to undertake the total research process with due care and honesty.
UNESCO continues to enforce some guidelines in relating to ethical issues in science and
technology since 1970s.
A report on “ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subject of
research” commonly known as “The Belmont Report” was published in 18 April 1979 and
there it is proposed three basic principles for the evaluation of research project involving
human
as a subject.
1. Respect to person
2. Beneficent
3. Justice

The Belmont Report is a foundational document in the field of bioethics, providing ethical
principles and guidelines for research involving human subjects. It was created by the
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and
Behavioral Research in the United States and published on April 18, 1979. The report
outlines principles to ensure the rights, safety, and well-being of research participants.
Three Core Ethical Principles

The Belmont Report identifies three key ethical principles that guide human subjects
research:

1. Respect for Persons:

o Individuals should be treated as autonomous agents with the freedom to make
informed decisions about their participation in research.
o Special protection should be given to those with diminished autonomy, such as
children, individuals with cognitive impairments, or vulnerable populations.
2. Beneficence:
o Researchers are obligated to maximize potential benefits while minimizing
harm or risks to participants.
o The principle focuses on ensuring the well-being of participants and
conducting risk-benefit analyses.
3. Justice:
o The benefits and burdens of research should be distributed fairly across all
groups in society.
o No population should be unfairly burdened or excluded from the potential
benefits of research without justification.

ETHICS ISSUES IN HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

Issues of ethics are very much neglected in the field of humanities, after 1990s the
researchers of in this disciplines are following research integrity. Humanities in the
European Research Area Joint Research Programme (HERA) pointed that “ethical
conduct of research [in humanities] was a matter for the conscience of the individual
researcher” (European Commission, Guidance Note for Researchers and Evaluators of
Social Sciences and Humanities Research (Draft), 2010.

Ethics Issues in Professional Studies

The researchers of this discipline must have to follow ethical issues very sincerely as human
beings are directly getting services from them. Thus some fundamental principles are to be
followed to behave ethically and these are:
[Link] to people’s dignity and rights
[Link] practice is to be maintained
[Link] in relationship is highly needed
[Link] to clientele is to be focused

Fabrication, Falsification and Plagiarism (FFP) : Research Fraud

The Department of Health and Human Services, office of the research integrity services US
National Institutes of Health has defined Research fraud or research misconduct research
misconduct is defined as “fabrication, falsification and plagiarism, and does not include
honest error or differences of opinion.”
Fabrication
It is the process of putting research data, recording, analyzing, reporting, concluding them
through simply synthetically and unethically.

Falsification
It is the process of changing of research contents, data, illustrations, equipment and processes
by means of manipulation with a view to set the research data with the desired result of the
research study.

Plagiarism
It is the process of putting one’s work, ideas, process, results, etc. without giving proper
acknowledgement (ORI, 2007).

The term “Plagiarism” has come into the form “plagiarius”

senses “kidnapper, seducer, plunderer, etc.”

Roman poet Martial has used the term first time in context of his poem around 80 AD.

At that time, poets were expected to be able to recite key works by other authors.
However, when Martial learned that another poet, Fidentinus, was reciting his works and
taking credit for them, Martial chose to respond. But Martial didn’t have the option of going
to the courts. Modern copyright law wouldn’t exist for another 1600 years and there was no
legal remedy available.

Instead, Martial wrote a series of verses about Fidentinus, essentially creating a diss track
about him.

From the Romans to the 17th century, skill was prized over originality and many great artists
and authors copied. This includes Shakespeare, who copied many of his most famous plots
and passages, and Leonardo Da Vinci, who copied some of his most famous works.

Part of this was there was no mass media. The printing press would not be invented until
1440.
Literacy rates were low (at 40% in England in 1533) and neither art nor books could be
trivially copied.

Definition of Plagiarism
Oxford Dictionary of English defines that plagiarism means "the practice of taking
someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own."

Forms of Plagiarism
There are various types of plagiarism or similarities has been identified and defined. These
kinds of similarities are serious issues on violations of academic integrity. Some common
types
of similarities have discussed below:-
 Direct / Verbatim Plagiarism : Directly stating a paragraph of text without
acknowledgement.
 Self-Plagiarism : Restating previous works and ideas of your own as in new scientific
writing.
 Mosaic Plagiarism : Mixing text and ideas from various resources without
acknowledgement.
 Accidental Plagiarism :
 Paraphrasing plagiarism : Restating one’s ideas without acknowledgement.
 Collusion :
 False citation : Deteriorating to use false information in acknowledgement.
 Failure to acknowledge assistance :
 Global Plagiarism : Using whole content without acknowledgement

Authorship
Harrods Librarian’s Glossary defines “author” -“The person, persons or corporate body,
responsible for the writing or compilation of a book or other publication.”

COPE has formulated the “authorship” for any document which should be based on some
characteristics in the preparation of manuscript through one or more characteristics as
follows:-
1 The writer should have to contribute substantial contribution or any design for the work
2 Collection, organization, interpretation of data during the period of study
3 Analysing, concluding critically the data for valid representation and scholarly
Communication

[Link] Authorship
Authorship should be very clear and explicit in nature i.e. complete name with conventional
parts of naming of the author should be clearly alphabetized who is accountable for the
published work. The pseudonym or any fictitious symbol either in abbreviation or numerical
form of anonymous authorship is not at all acceptable.

[Link] Authorship
A ghost author is an author who has contributed substantially in writing the research
manuscript but his name is not mentioned in the author place explicitly. However, the authors
have not acknowledged their contribution either in preface or in acknowledgement area. As
their name is not mention in the authors place, for this reason they are termed as ghost author.
This publisher has no right to put their name in the author’s place. Or in case if these ghost
author demand them as one of the author of this publication this can be acceptable also. As
the ghost authors have contributed something, so their names treated as authors at per. Those
who make small contributions that would not qualify them as an author should be listed in the
acknowledgements with the extent of their contribution clearly stated (Schofferman, 2015).

3. Guest Authorship
Guest authorship refers to senior authors who are included because of their respect or
influence in the hope that this will increase the likelihood of publication and/or impact of the
paper once published (Harvey, 2018).

4. Gift Authorship
Gift authorship refers to the practice of offering authorship to a senior or junior colleague in
the blatant or surreptitious hope that they will return the favor and they are included in the list
of co-authors though they have no significant contribution in that particular study (Harvey,
2018).
 [Link] authorship
Honorary authorship refers to those who are named as authors merely because they hold
senior positions within the service or facility where the research occurred, and may have
helped secure funding (Harvey, 2018).

6. Surrogate Authorship
This is a kind of authorship where this present author presents or submit a work without give
his own data or description or explanation but only citing the ideas of the original authors. It
is actually happens in philosophical and political thought [Link] stressed in his
writing published in “Nature” that Gift, Guest, and Honorary authorship be treated as at best
opportunistic and at worse scientific misconduct (Rajasekaran S., Li Pi, S. R., Finnoff, 2014).

Conflict of Interest (COI)

The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) A
conflict of interest exists when two or more contradictory interests relate to an activity by an
individual or an institution. The conflict lies in the situation, not in any behavior or lack of
behavior of the individual. That means that a conflict of interest is not intrinsically a bad
thing.

Examples include a conflict between financial gain and meticulous completion and reporting
of a research study or between responsibilities as an investigator and as a treating physician
forthe same trial participant.

According to Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Conflicts of interest are

"situations in which financial or other personal considerations may compromise, or have the
appearance of compromising, an investigator's judgment in conducting or reporting research"
(AAMC, 1990).

In the year 1992, a white document was published by the joint venture of National Academy
of Sciences; National Academy of Engineering; Institute of Medicine; Committee on Science,
Engineering, and Public Policy; Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of
Research

(NAS, 1992) towards the fostering faculty and student awareness relating to integrity of
research process.

Integrity in Scientific Research defines "A conflict of interest in research exists when the
individual has interests in the outcome of the research that may lead to a personal advantage
and that might therefore, in actuality or appearance compromise the integrity of the research."

There are few following types of typical conflicts of interest listed by Canadian political
scientists Ken Kernaghan and John Langford in their book, “The Responsible Public
Servant”:-
Self-dealing - One works for government and use one’s official position to secure a contract
for a private consulting company one’s own. Another instance is using one’s government
position to get a summer job for one’s daughter.
Accepting benefits Bribery is one example; substantial [non token] gifts are another. For
example, you are the purchasing agent for your department and you accept a case of liquor
from a major supplier.
Influence peddling Here, the professional solicits benefits in exchange for using her
influence to unfairly advance the interests of a particular party.
Using your employer’s property for private advantage. This could be as blatant as stealing
office supplies for home use. Or it might be a bit more subtle, say, using software which is
licensed to your employer for private consulting work of your own. In the first case, the
employer’s permission eliminates the conflict; while in the second, it doesn’t.
Using confidential information. While working for a private client, you learn that the client
is planning to buy land in your region. You quickly rush out and buy the land in your wife’s
name.
Outside employment or moonlighting. An example would be setting up a business on the
side that is in direct competition with your employer. Another case would be taking on so
many outside clients that you don’t have the time and energy to devote to your regular
employer. In combination with [3] influence peddling, it might be that a professional
employed in the public service sells private consulting services to an individual with the
assurance that they will secure benefits from government: “If you use my company, I am sure
that you will pass the environmental review.”
Post-employment. Here a dicey situation can be one in which a person who resigns from
public or private employment and goes into business in the same area. For example, a former
public servant sets up a practice lobbying the former department in which she was employed.