Scientific misconduct is a wilful violation of standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behaviour in the publication of professional scientific research. While misconduct can occur at any stage of the research, writing, peer review and publication processes, this post focuses on how journal editorial offices investigate and act upon allegations of scientific misconduct of authors.

Determining authorship can be one of the most vexing tasks in scientific publishing, especially in certain scenarios. In this article, which is the first of a two-article series, we look at certain authorship types in scientific publishing that are considered largely unacceptable by the community, and which you should thus ideally avoid.

Determining authorship can be one of the most vexing tasks in scientific publishing. In the first article of this two-part series, we looked at certain issues of problematic authorship. In this second and concluding article in the series, we look at what constitutes legitimate authorship, including acknowledging the contribution by professional medical writers and editors.

Researching and then writing and submitting your research papers present a challenge at every turn. This article discusses common mistakes, collected into a few categories, which quickly lead to a manuscript’s rejection.

Paraphrasing is expressing what you have read or referenced in your own words. In some ways, paraphrasing is the opposite of plagiarism because it involves conveying in your own words what somebody else has expressed differently.

In academic publishing, the affiliation of an author is the place (institution) at which the author conducted the research that they have reported / written about. This article explains the significance of affiliation and illustrates how to accurately mention your affiliation in different scenarios.

The multi-authored paper now represents the norm, especially in STEM publishing. With more authors, however, certain questions arise that need to be tackled. In this article, we discuss the various intricacies involved in co-authorship.

In research, bias means a deviation from the truth in data collection, analysis, interpretation or publication. This article discusses the reasons why biases occur and some steps for avoiding them.

A duplicate publication is the publication of the same paper in more than one journal. It may also refer to the publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published, without reference to the original publication.

This webinar, organised for Peer Review Week 2022, discusses the importance of peer review in enabling research integrity.

Withdrawals and/or retractions can negatively impact your reputation as a researcher, which is why it is important to avoid them and keep your publication pipeline healthy and productive.

Every step of research — from conception to publication — is prone to bias. Thus, it is imperative to understand the various forms and flavours of bias so that you can avoid them and produce verifiable, replicable and reliable research.

We’re constantly taught to be confident and to stop comparing ourselves to others, and yet, we still do. It’s human nature to benchmark our own performance against what’s around us, whether it’s for personal reasons or at work. Who hasn’t been at a group meeting, heard news about a colleague who’s just published in a high-impact journal and been hit by a pang of disappointment? Our immediate thought is:

Why haven’t I published yet?

Here are a few suggestions to manage these thoughts and develop a more helpful mindset.

Financial bias can be described as “any financial involvement or entanglement between an author, editor, or peer reviewer of an academic article and that of an external entity which has an interest in the article.” 

Inclusion of figures from published papers is a common practice in academic research and scholarly writing. Figures such as graphs, charts and images serve as valuable visual aids, providing readers with a clear and concise representation of complex data. 

In scientific publishing, reputable journals consistently demand that authors disclose any potential conflicts of interest. At its core, a conflict of interest — also known as competing interest — arises when individuals hold competing loyalties or interests, casting a shadow over the objectivity of their work. 

The recent plagiarism allegations against Harvard President Claudine Gay have once again highlighted how plagiarism can compromise the principle of academic integrity. While this may appear to be a clear-cut case of plagiarism, the reality is more layered.

In the academic publishing landscape, authorship attribution stands as a cornerstone of recognition and accountability. However, amidst the complexities of collaborative research and evolving publication norms, crafting clear and equitable authorship statements can become a daunting task for even the most seasoned scholars.