Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Science journal editors' views on publication ethics: results of an international survey.E. Wager, S. Fiack, C. Graf, A. Robinson & I. Rowlands - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (6):348-353.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Perceptions of ethical problems with scientific journal Peer review: An exploratory study.David B. Resnik, Christina Gutierrez-Ford & Shyamal Peddada - 2008 - Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3):305-310.
    This article reports the results of an anonymous survey of researchers at a government research institution concerning their perceptions about ethical problems with journal peer review. Incompetent review was the most common ethical problem reported by the respondents, with 61.8% (SE = 3.3%) claiming to have experienced this at some point during peer review. Bias (50.5%, SE = 3.4%) was the next most common problem. About 22.7% (SE = 2.8%) of respondents said that a reviewer had required them to include (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Conflict(s) of Interest in Peer Review: Its Origins and Possible Solutions.Anton Oleinik - 2013 - Science and Engineering Ethics (1):1-21.
    Scientific communication takes place at two registers: first, interactions with colleagues in close proximity—members of a network, school of thought or circle; second, depersonalised transactions among a potentially unlimited number of scholars can be involved (e.g., author and readers). The interference between the two registers in the process of peer review produces a drift toward conflict of interest. Three particular cases of peer review are differentiated: journal submissions, grant applications and applications for tenure. The current conflict of interest policies do (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Ethical practice in the accounting publishing process: Contrasting opinions of authors and editors. [REVIEW]Susan C. Borkowski & Mary Jeanne Welsh - 2000 - Journal of Business Ethics 25 (1):15 - 31.
    Academic accounting researchers often offer anecdotal evidence that the publishing process is rife with unfair and unethical practices, and similar contradictory evidence supports accounting journal editors' claims that the process is fair and ethical. This study compares the perceptions of accounting authors and editors on the ethicacy and frequency of specific author, editor and reviewer practices. Both authors and editors are in general agreement about the ethical nature of editors and author practices. However, there are significant differences between the groups (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations