Challenges to ethical publishing in the digital era
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-08-2015-0026 |
| Date | 14 March 2016 |
| Pages | 4-15 |
| Published date | 14 March 2016 |
| Author | Mirjam Jessica Curno |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Information management & governance |
Challenges to ethical publishing
in the digital era
Mirjam Jessica Curno
Committee on Publication Ethics, UK and Frontiers,
Lausanne, Switzerland
Abstract
Purpose – The aim of this paper is to lay out some of the more complex issues arising in the area of
publication ethics. The impact of electronic publishing and electronic information is a main focus of the
paper.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws in particular upon the work of the Committee on
Publication Ethics including illustrative cases discussed at the forum, guidelines and discussion
documents.
Findings – Three areas are highlighted to stimulate discussion around challenges of publication
ethics in the digital era. These are the role of the internet in facilitating misconduct, the issue of
condentiality in publishing and how incentives in research assessments drive author behavior.
Originality/value – The paper brings together a variety of issues discussed under the broader
umbrella of electronic information and new technologies in publishing.
Keywords Ethics, Electronic publishing, Scholarly literature
Paper type Viewpoint
Introduction
In April 1997, Mike Farthing, who had taken over the editorship of Gut, met with fellow
journal editors including the BMJ,The Lancet,British Journal of Anaesthesia and
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery to discuss several cases of misconduct that he had
been confronted with in his rst year. The discussions at this rst meeting highlighted
the wide spectrum of misconduct encountered by these editors in their daily work
and the usefulness of exchanging experiences and advice. The rst open meeting in
November 1997 sparked the birth of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Mike
Farthing commented in the annual report in 1998 “COPE is an experiment” and Richard
Smith, the editor of the BMJ at the time, added “it may not prove useful in the long term, and
we will be delighted if it is made unnecessary because the international profession produces
an adequate response to research misconduct” (publicationethics.org). Nearly 20 years later,
rather than becoming “unnecessary”, COPE has grown into a global organization
supporting over 10,000 member editors and publishers, and has become an internationally
The COPE cases included in this review are reproduced here with permission from COPE and
were adapted for readability. All cases are freely accessible at www.publicationethics.org
Conicts of interest declaration: Mirjam J. Curno is a council member of the Committee on
Publication Ethics and a full-time member of staff at the publisher Frontiers. This review was
written on invitation by the journal.
Funding declaration: No funding was used for this work.
Author contribution statement: Mirjam J. Curno wrote the article and approved the nal
version.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1477-996X.htm
JICES
14,1
4
Received 18 August 2015
Accepted 29 August 2015
Journalof Information,
Communicationand Ethics in
Society
Vol.14 No. 1, 2016
pp.4-15
©Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1477-996X
DOI 10.1108/JICES-08-2015-0026
To continue reading
Request your trial