For Authors: Publication Ethics Statements

Responsible research publication: international criteria for authors. Adapted from Wager E. and Kleinert S. (2011). A position statement formulated at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, held in Singapore from July22-24, 2010. In: Mayer T. and Steneck N. (eds.), Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment, chapter 50. Singapore: Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing (pp 309-16). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7)

Responsible publication of research

For Authors: Statements on Publication Ethics

Adapted from Wager E. and S. Kleinert (2011), Responsible research publication: international criteria for authors. A position statement created at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, held in Singapore from July 22-24, 2010. Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Setting, edited by T. Mayer and N. Steneck, chapter 50. Imperial College Press and World Scientific Publishing in Singapore (pp 309-16). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7)

Publication of academic research

1 Stability and soundness

1.1 The submitted study should have been done in an ethical and responsible manner and in accordance with all applicable laws.

1.2 The presented study should be rigorous and meticulously conducted.

1.3 Researchers should employ acceptable methods of data analysis and presentation (and, if needed, seek and follow specialist advice on this).

1.4 Authors should collectively assume responsibility for their work and the substance of their writings. Researchers should double-check their publications at all stages to verify that techniques and results are appropriately stated. Calculations, data displays, typescripts/submissions, and proofs should be thoroughly reviewed by authors.

2 Honesty

2.1 Researchers should present their results without fabrication, falsification, or incorrect data manipulation. Images used in research (such as micrographs, X-rays, and photographs of electrophoresis gels) should not be altered in a way that is deceptive.

2.2 Researchers should endeavor to properly and unambiguously define their techniques and communicate their findings. Researchers should adhere to applicable criteria for reporting. Experiments should be sufficiently described in publications so that other researchers can replicate them.

2.3 Research summaries must be exhaustive. They should not exclude inconvenient, inconsistent, or inexplicable findings or results that contradict the authors' or sponsors' hypothesis or interpretation.

2.4 Research funders and sponsors should not have the ability to veto the publication of findings that are not favorable to their product or position. Researchers should not enter into contracts that allow the research sponsor to veto or control publication of their findings (unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as research classified by governments because of security implications).

2.5 If an author discovers an error in a submitted, accepted, or published work, he or she must immediately notify the editor. When corrections or retractions are necessary, authors should assist editors in publishing them.

2.6 In citations and direct quotations, authors should accurately represent the work of others.

2.7 Authors should not copy references from other publications without having read the work cited.

3 Balance

3.1 New findings should be presented in the context of prior studies. It is important to accurately represent the work of others. Academic reviews and synthesis of existing research should be comprehensive, well-balanced, and comprise all relevant findings, regardless of whether or not they support the proposed hypothesis or interpretation. There should be a clear distinction between scholarly reviews and editorials or opinion pieces presenting a single viewpoint or argument.

3.2 Publications should include a discussion of the limitations of the study.

4 Originality

4.1 Authors must adhere to publication requirements that stipulate the submitted work is original and has not been published in any language elsewhere. Unless the editors have agreed to co-publication, work should not be submitted simultaneously to multiple publications. This fact should be made clear to readers if articles are co-published.

4.2 Copyright regulations and conventions should be observed. Copyright-protected materials (such as tables, figures, and lengthy quotations) should only be reproduced with permission and credit.

4.3 Relevant prior work and publications, both by other researchers and by the authors, should be appropriately acknowledged and cited. Whenever possible, primary sources must be cited.

4.4 Data, text, figures, or ideas originating from other researchers should be appropriately cited and not presented as the authors' own. Original language taken directly from the works of other scholars should be enclosed in quotation marks and accompanied by the proper citations.

4.5 Authors should notify editors if their findings have been previously published or if multiple reports or multiple analyses of the same data set are being considered for publication elsewhere. Authors are required to submit copies of relevant publications and work submitted to other journals.

Multiple publications resulting from a single research project must be clearly identified as such, and the primary publication must be cited. Translations and adaptations for various audiences must be clearly identified as such, must credit the original source, and must adhere to all applicable copyright conventions and permission requirements. When in doubt, authors should seek permission from the original publisher before republishing any work.

5. Assurance of Openness

5.1 All sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, the supply of equipment or materials, and other support (such as statistical or writing assistance from a specialist) should be disclosed.

5.2 Authors must disclose the role of the research funder(s) or sponsor(s) in the research design, execution, analysis, interpretation, and reporting, if any.

5.3 Authors must disclose relevant financial and non-financial interests and relationships that may be deemed likely to influence the interpretation of their findings or that editors, reviewers, or readers may have a reasonable desire to know. This includes any relationship with the journal, such as if the editors publish their own research in their own publication. In addition, authors must adhere to journal and institution requirements regarding the disclosure of competing interests.

6 Appropriate attribution of authorship and citation

6.1 The research literature serves not only as a record of what has been discovered, but also of who made the discovery. Therefore, the authorship of research publications must accurately reflect individuals' contributions to the work and its documentation.

6.2 In cases where major contributors are listed as authors and those who made less substantial or purely technical contributions to the research or publication are listed in an acknowledgement section, the criteria for authorship and acknowledgement must be agreed upon at the outset of the project. Authorship criteria within a particular field should ideally be agreed upon, published, and consistently applied by research institutions, academic and professional societies, and funders. While journal editors should publish and promote authorship criteria appropriate to their field, they cannot be expected to resolve authorship disputes. The authors themselves, working under the direction of their institution, are accountable for the correct attribution of authorship. Research institutions should promote and uphold standards of authorship and attribution that are equitable and widely accepted. When necessary, institutions should arbitrate authorship disputes and ensure that proper procedures are followed.

6.3 Researchers should ensure that only those who meet authorship criteria (i.e. made a substantial contribution to the work) are credited with authorship, and that deserving authors are not overlooked. Institutions and journal editors ought to promote practices that discourage guest, gift, and ghost authorship.

Note:

Guest authors are those who do not meet accepted authorship criteria but are listed due to their prominence, reputation, or assumed influence.

Guest Authors are those who do not meet accepted authorship criteria but are listed as a favor or for compensation.

Guest authors are individuals who meet authorship criteria but are not credited.

6.4 All authors must agree to be listed and must also approve the submitted and accepted versions of the publication. All authors, including those who have been removed from the list, must approve any changes to the author list. The corresponding author should serve as a liaison between the editor and the other authors, keep co-authors informed, and include them in major publication decisions (such as responding to reviewer comments).

6.5 Authors should not use acknowledgements in a misleading manner to imply a contribution or endorsement by individuals who did not actually contribute to the work or provide an endorsement.

7 Accountability and Resposibility

7.1 All authors must have read and be familiar with the work being reported, and they must ensure that their publications adhere to the principles outlined in these guidelines. In the majority of instances, authors will be expected to share responsibility for the research's validity and its reporting. However, if authors are only responsible for a subset of the research and its reporting, this should be indicated in the publication.

7.2 After publication, if errors or omissions are discovered, authors should work with the editor or publisher to promptly correct their work.

7.3 Authors must adhere to applicable conventions, requirements, and regulations when making materials, reagents, software, or data sets accessible to other researchers upon request. Researchers, institutions, and funders should have transparent policies for handling such requests. Authors must also adhere to journal-specific requirements. While acknowledgment is expected, researchers should not require authorship as a prerequisite for sharing materials.

7.4 Authors must appropriately respond to post-publication comments and published correspondence. They should attempt to respond to questions from correspondents and, when necessary, provide clarifications or additional information.

8 Conformity with publication and peer review conventions

8.1 Authors must adhere to publisher guidelines prohibiting simultaneous submission of the same work to multiple publications for review.

8.2 Authors must notify the editor if they withdraw a work from consideration or choose not to respond to reviewer comments after receiving a conditional acceptance.

8.3 Authors should respond to reviewer comments with professionalism and promptness.

8.4 Authors should honor publishers' requests for press embargos and, in general, should not allow their findings to be reported in the press if they have been accepted for publication (but not yet published) in a scholarly journal. To coordinate media activity (such as press releases and press conferences) surrounding publication, authors and their institutions should collaborate with publishers. The work should be accurately reflected in press releases, and statements that go beyond the research findings should be avoided.

9 Responsible reporting of research involving human or animal subjects

9.1 Appropriate approval, licensing, or registration must be obtained prior to the commencement of research, with specifics included in the report (e.g. Institutional Review Board, Research Ethics Committee approval, national licensing authorities for the use of animals).

9.2 If requested by editors, authors must provide evidence that the reported research received the necessary approval and was conducted ethically (e.g. copies of approvals, licences, participant consent forms).

9.3 Researchers should not publish or share identifiable individual data collected during research without the explicit consent of the individual (or their representative). Researchers should keep in mind that many scholarly journals are now freely accessible online, and should therefore be aware of the possibility of endangering or offending unintended readers (e.g. research participants or their families who recognise themselves from case studies, descriptions, images or pedigrees).

9.4 The appropriate statistical analyses should be determined at the outset of the study, and a data analysis plan for the predetermined outcomes should be developed and adhered to. Secondary or ad hoc analyses must be distinguished from primary analyses and those outlined in the plan for data analysis.

9.5 Researchers are obligated to publish all significant research findings that could contribute to comprehension. Specifically, there is an ethical obligation to publish all clinical trial results. Publication of failed studies or experiments that refute a hypothesis can prevent others from wasting time and resources on similar endeavors. If findings from small studies and those that fail to reach statistical significance can be combined to produce more useful information (via meta-analysis, for example), then such findings should be published.

9.6 Authors should provide research protocols to journal editors upon request (e.g., for clinical trials) so that reviewers and editors can compare the research report to the protocol to ensure that it was conducted according to plan and that no pertinent details were omitted. All publications resulting from a clinical trial should include the trial's registration number, which should be obtained by adhering to the relevant requirements for clinical trial registration.