Dear Editor, I read the recent publication on “Misconduct in Research and Publication” with great interest[1]. I agree that misconduct in research and publication is not uncommon. Nevertheless, it is rarely mentioned. In fact, there are many incorrect conceptions among researchers on publication ethics. The milder examples are attempts to report only the “positive outcomes&rdq...

There is limited formal guidance on how institutions and academic journals collaborate to promote responsible conduct of research. Since the issuance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guiding document, " Cooperation between research institutions and journals on integrity cases " (4), little else has been published on the topic. As a result, institutions are left to interpret—with va...

Accessible online at: www.karger.com/oph The aim of peer-reviewed biomedical journals is to publish accurate, new and relevant information on which researchers, medical doctors or the larger public can rely and build upon. Authors, reviewers and editors of such journals have responsibility for monitoring and maintaining high ethical standards and for trying to avoid any form of misconduct. This...

S everal high-profile cases of research misconduct during the past decade have explicitly raised the question whether co-authors share responsibility for scientific misconduct perpetrated by a collaborator. There is no clear answer though, as different cases of misconduct differ in terms of how the co-authors were involved in the work. Nonetheless, media coverage, public interest, and intense d...

Though scientific misconduct perpetrated by authors has received much press, little attention has been given to the role of journal editors. This article discusses cases and types of “editorial misconduct”, in which the action or inaction of editorial agents ended in publication of fraudulent work and/or poor or failed retractions of such works, all of which ultimately harm scientific integrity...

A model-based approach was used to develop performance measures from inmate misconduct data to compare public and private prisons. The performance measures indicated the impact of different prisons upon raising or lowering the probability of inmate misconduct. Data for all misconduct and two categories of misconduct, violent and drug, were generated for the 36 month period between January of 19...

We hypothesized that scientific misconduct (data fabrication or falsification) is goal-directed behavior. This hypothesis predicts that papers retracted for misconduct: are targeted to journals with a high impact factor (IF); are written by authors with additional papers withdrawn for misconduct; diffuse responsibility across many (perhaps innocent) co-authors; and are retracted slower than pap...

imposed by DHHS and, if so, what they should be. As the biomedical and behavioral research community continues to adopt policies and procedures that deal effectively with allegations or suspicions of scientific misconduct, the OSI should find fewer occasions to conduct its own investigations. Strong institutional frameworks for dealing with scientific misconduct also will enable the PHS to focu...

S everal high-profile cases of research misconduct during the past decade have explicitly raised the question whether co-authors share responsibility for scientific misconduct perpetrated by a collaborator. There is no clear answer though, as different cases of misconduct differ in terms of how the co-authors were involved in the work. Nonetheless, media coverage, public interest, and intense d...

S everal high-profile cases of research misconduct during the past decade have explicitly raised the question whether co-authors share responsibility for scientific misconduct perpetrated by a collaborator. There is no clear answer though, as different cases of misconduct differ in terms of how the co-authors were involved in the work. Nonetheless, media coverage, public interest, and intense d...