Publications 2014, 2(2), 51-60; doi:10.3390/publications2020051
Review

Editorial Misconduct—Definition, Cases, and Causes

email
Received: 17 December 2013; in revised form: 25 February 2014 / Accepted: 28 March 2014 / Published: 4 April 2014
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Misconduct in Scientific Publishing)
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract: 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 and the integrity of the journals involved. Rare but existent, editorial misconduct ranges in severity and includes deliberate omission or ignorance of peer review, insufficient guidelines for authors, weak or disingenuous retraction notices, and refusal to retract. The factors responsible for editorial misconduct and the options to address these are discussed.
Keywords: scientific misconduct; retraction; editors; journals; peer review
PDF Full-text Download PDF Full-Text [176 KB, uploaded 4 April 2014 15:41 CEST]

Export to BibTeX |
EndNote


MDPI and ACS Style

Shelomi, M. Editorial Misconduct—Definition, Cases, and Causes. Publications 2014, 2, 51-60.

AMA Style

Shelomi M. Editorial Misconduct—Definition, Cases, and Causes. Publications. 2014; 2(2):51-60.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shelomi, Matan. 2014. "Editorial Misconduct—Definition, Cases, and Causes." Publications 2, no. 2: 51-60.

Publications EISSN 2304-6775 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert