文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

Science journal editors' views on publication ethics: results of an international survey.

作者信息

Wager E, Fiack S, Graf C, Robinson A, Rowlands I

机构信息

Sideview, 19 Station Road, Princes Risborough HP27 9DE, UK.

出版信息

J Med Ethics. 2009 Jun;35(6):348-53. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.028324.


DOI:10.1136/jme.2008.028324
PMID:19482976
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Breaches of publication ethics such as plagiarism, data fabrication and redundant publication are recognised as forms of research misconduct that can undermine the scientific literature. We surveyed journal editors to determine their views about a range of publication ethics issues. METHODS: Questionnaire sent to 524 editors-in-chief of Wiley-Blackwell science journals asking about the severity and frequency of 16 ethical issues at their journals, their confidence in handling such issues, and their awareness and use of guidelines. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 231 editors (44%), of whom 48% edited healthcare journals. The general level of concern about the 16 issues was low, with mean severity scores of <1 (on a scale of 0-3) for all but one. The issue of greatest concern (mean score 1.19) was redundant publication. Most editors felt confident in handling the issues, with <15% feeling "not at all confident" for all but one of the issues (gift authorship, 22% not confident). Most editors believed such problems occurred less than once a year and >20% of the editors stated that 12 of the 16 items never occurred at their journal. However, 13%-47% did not know the frequency of the problems. Awareness and use of guidelines was generally low. Most editors were unaware of all except other journals' instructions. CONCLUSIONS: Most editors of science journals seem not very concerned about publication ethics and believe that misconduct occurs only rarely in their journals. Many editors are unfamiliar with available guidelines but would welcome more guidance or training.

摘要

相似文献

[1]
Science journal editors' views on publication ethics: results of an international survey.

J Med Ethics. 2009-6

[2]
Views of Iranian medical journal editors on medical research publication.

Saudi Med J. 2004-1

[3]
Ethical issues faced by nursing editors.

West J Nurs Res. 2005-6

[4]
Advertising in dermatology journals: journals' and journal editors' policies, practices, and attitudes.

J Am Acad Dermatol. 2006-7

[5]
[Ethics in articles published in medical journals].

Rev Med Chil. 2007-4

[6]
Ethics and scientific publication.

Adv Physiol Educ. 2005-6

[7]
Prepublication review of medical ethics research: cause for concern.

Acad Med. 2009-4

[8]
Promoting ethical conduct in the publication of research.

Cardiovasc Ther. 2008

[9]
Journal policy on ethics in scientific publication.

Ann Emerg Med. 2003-1

[10]
Journal publication ethics 201: culture in crisis?

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010-3

引用本文的文献

[1]
Reputation shortcoming in academic publishing.

PLoS One. 2025-4-29

[2]
Misconduct in Biomedical Research: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2023-6-29

[3]
What senior academics can do to support reproducible and open research: a short, three-step guide.

BMC Res Notes. 2022-3-22

[4]
Comprehensive analysis of retracted journal articles in the field of veterinary medicine and animal health.

BMC Vet Res. 2022-2-18

[5]
Transparency of peer review: a semi-structured interview study with chief editors from social sciences and humanities.

Res Integr Peer Rev. 2021-11-18

[6]
Estimating the prevalence of text overlap in biomedical conference abstracts.

Res Integr Peer Rev. 2021-2-1

[7]
Editors Should Declare Conflicts of Interest.

J Bioeth Inq. 2019-4-23

[8]
Resolving authorship disputes by mediation and arbitration.

Res Integr Peer Rev. 2018-11-16

[9]
An international survey and modified Delphi process revealed editors' perceptions, training needs, and ratings of competency-related statements for the development of core competencies for scientific editors of biomedical journals.

F1000Res. 2017-9-4

[10]
The visibility of scientific misconduct: A review of the literature on retracted journal articles.

Curr Sociol. 2017-10

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索