Developing Responsible Authorship and Publication

Practices

Thomas C. ChilesResearch and Scholarship Integrity

ProgramMarch 21, 2015

Responsible Authorship & Publication EthicsPublications as the mechanism for career advancement, prestige/recognition, etc., thus a major site for research misconduct, questionable research practices, manipulation, etc.

Responsible Authorship

Criteria for authorshipWhat does being an author mean?Who should be an author?Who is the senior author, first author, corresponding author?

Authorship order

Collaborative research

Different authorship conventions between disciplines

Importance of laying out ground rules of authorship by PI

Resource sharing

Responsible Authorship & Publication Ethics

Questionable/unethical authorship practices

FFP (Fraud, Falsification, Manipulation of digital data, Plagiarism, including self-plagiarism)

Inappropriate citationsUnderciting, citation amnesiaCiting work (either one’s own or another’s to boost article’s popularity)

Ghostwriting

Honorary/gift authorship

Responsible Authorship & Publication EthicsPublication ethics

PublicationsAbstract, Introduction, Materials & Methods, Results, Discussion, Citations/references, AcknowledgementsFunding support, Conflict of interest

Use of animals (IACUC) & human subjects (IRB)Biohazards

Sharing data/novel reagents

Reproducibility/statistics

Responsible Authorship & Publication EthicsPublication ethics

Selection of journal-how?

Perceived cracks in the systemRetraction system—how well does it work?

Subscription only journals vs. open access

Impact factor

Questionable/unethical publication practicesInappropriately dividing data analysis/experiments into small units for increased publications (salami publishing)

Publishing too similar articles for increased publications

Responsible Authorship & Publication Ethics

Peer review (mostly as pertains to journal publications)

Responsibilities of the reviewer, of the journal.

Maintaining confidentialityTimeliness of the reviewFair and balanced criticisms, non-personalNoting any conflicts of interest

Should mentors let trainees review a manuscript? If so, how should this be done?

Questionable/unethical peer review practices

Manipulating the recommending reviewers system to nominate those who will uncritically examine your work (a colleague, friend)

Responsible Authorship & Publication Ethics

Peer review (mostly as pertains to journal publications)

Responsibilities of the reviewer, of the journal.

Maintaining confidentialityTimeliness of the reviewFair and balanced criticisms, non-personalNoting any conflicts of interest

Should mentors let trainees review a manuscript? If so, how should this be done?

Questionable/unethical peer review practices

Manipulating the recommending reviewers system to nominate those who will uncritically examine your work (a colleague, friend)

Responsible Authorship & Publication Ethics

Research policies –special considerations, IndustryThere is a tendency at times to be so desirous of building external relationships that investigators can be willing to compromise their rights to publish.

We have seen cases, over and over again (and particularly when working with industry), that researchers think this is a temporary thing and that they only need to compromise just this one time in order to build the relationship.

The problem is that industry and other partners may and probably do have different interests in their publication practices (e.g. protecting their proprietary interest).

So , these research collaborators and partners try to assert restrictions or downright approval on intended publications. The most dangerous situation is when the partners agree to acceptable terms in a sponsored agreement, but then negotiate "side-deals" with the investigators that contradict the sponsored agreements.

This places the investigators in conflict with their university responsibilities, forces the investigators to defy the terms of the sponsored agreement. They also place themselves in the position of essentially being named as authors of publications that do not then represent the true finds of their own research.

Responsible Authorship & Publication Ethics

Research policies –special considerations, Classified research

www.bc.edu/research/osp/principles.html

Classified research which requires a security clearance by any public or private agency will not be conducted under Boston College's auspices, except perhaps in time of national emergency. Sponsored funding may not be accepted by the University if there is a high probability or certainty that a faculty member's work will later be covered by classification or confidentiality restrictions.

Research, the results of which cannot be made public or in any other way negatively affects a student's ability to freely discuss his or her work, shall not be used as the basis of a thesis or dissertation. The source of sponsorship and purpose of a sponsored activity must be of such a nature that they can be publicly disclosed.

All research or other projects involving human subjects, animal subjects, and/or hazardous or potentially hazardous biological, chemical, or radiological agents must be conducted in accordance with the guidelines, policies, and procedures as may be established by the University for such work.