Plagiarism… from an Editor’s perspective

Ginny Barbour, Chair, COPEwww.publicationethics.org

@ginnybarbour

#crossref12

November 14, 2012

An editor’s perspective

• What is plagiarism in 2012?• Where does COPE come in?• Challenges for the future

Plagiarism in academic publications has many

forms…PLOS’ experience in 2012 of submitted papers

• Minor plagiarism – around 5-10%• Major plagiarism – less than 1%

…and self plagiarism

Iain Chalmers: Intentional self-plagiarism

I have suggested previously in The Lancet that forms of scientific misconduct should be ranked by their potential for doing harm to patients: biased reporting of research, for example, has more serious consequences for patients than undeserved authorship and plagiarism.2 This sentence is an example of intentional self-plagiarism. I have reused words used in a previous publication because they help me to challenge the Editorial's implication.The Editorial characterises self-plagiarism in review or opinion papers as “an attempt to deceive editors and readers”, and that, at best, it “constitutes intellectual laziness”. Most of my recent publications are “opinion” papers, so I resent this ex cathedra judgment, unsupported by any references to empirical evidence.I reuse my previously used words intentionally in my repeated attempts to persuade readers and editors to take serious problems seriously.

The Lancet, Volume 374, Issue 9699, Page 1422, 24 October 2009

Detection is better but ≠ solution

Education, education…

Where COPE comes in

• Education of editors

• Advice to member editors

• Facilitate and lead debate on publishing ethics

COPE structure• Run by an elected international Council

• Current officers are: Ginny Barbour (Chair), Charlotte Haug, (Vice Chair), Margaret Rees and André van Steirteghem(Co-Secretaries), and Chris Graf (Treasurer)

• Council members are trustees of COPE as a charity and directors of COPE as a limited company

• Day-to-day management of COPE’s business affairs is the responsibility of :

– Operations Manager (Natalie Ridgeway)– Administrator (Linda Gough)– Web Manager (Cynthia Clerk)

COPE members in 2012...

• More than 7500 members

• International in scope and fully inclusive in subject matter - all academic disciplines and fields are now covered, eg:– Pure and applied sciences– Biomedicine– Engineering and technology– Arts, humanities and social sciences

COPE : advice and guidance to members

"Few journals have the internal resources to deal with all the complex ethical and procedural issues that arise from misbehaviour by a small minority of authors. Fortunately, COPE provides a supportive community of experienced editorial staff ready to offer useful advice and share lessons learned from dealing with similar problems. Decisions can be made with much greater confidence knowing that they are supported by one's peers.”

Philip Steer, British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology

COPE in action

• Website – www.publicationethics.org• Flowcharts• Cases• Newsletter

• Forum meetings

• Seminars

• Discussion documents

COPE in action: www.publicationethics.org

Flowcharts (also available translated into select languages – more being added)

Sample letters for handling common problems Retraction guidelines Presentations Other guidance (eg, for editorial boards) An eLearning course aimed at new editors (members only)• A Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guide for Journal

Editors • A Code of Conduct for Publishers

The flowcharts cover:

• Redundant (duplicate) publication• Plagiarism• Fabricated data• Changes in authorship• Ghost, guest or gift authorship• Conflicts of interest• General suspected ethical concerns• Reviewer misconduct • How COPE deals with complaints

COPE in action: cases

• All cases are entered into online database on the website

• Searchable by keyword

• Used in e-learning

COPE Forum meetings

• Member benefit• Quarterly meetings• Most held in London but members can take

part via tele-conference• First virtual forum planned for 2013• Also have forum meetings before seminars

Format• General discussion and advice of cases• Case, advice & follow up published on website• Now recorded and the audio published with a summary of the

case on the website

Challenges for the future

• How do we deal with blogs, tweets … other academic activity

• Technology is only a diagnostic tool, not a solution

• We need an informed debate and acceptance of increased scrutiny

“Dear editors,What is your estimate of overlap?http://spore.vbi.vt.edu/xxxx<http:/**/spore.vbi.vt.edu/dejavu/**yyyAre all the patients new between the studies?”

“Dear editors,What is your evidence of overlap?http://spore.vbi.vt.edu/xxxxWhy is the writing so similar? Why are the titles differently formulated?”

This is the world that we live in….

http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/

Education is key