Antifraud editorial policy in Spanish and Latin American scientific publication: JCR social sciences edition

 Alejandra Hernández-Ruiz, Alicante (Spain)

https://doi.org/10.3916/C48-2016-02

Keywords

Ethics, scientific publication, instructions to authors, editorial policy, scientific fraud, Social Sciences, Spain, Latin America

Abstract

The process of publishing scientific papers should be based on universal principles of professional conduct: credibility, truth and authenticity. In academia, the inclusion of policies on ethical standards in journal instructions to authors could prevent misconduct and fraud in scientific publication. Due to the lack of attention to research ethics in the Social Sciences, in particular in Spain and Latin America, this research aims to analyze the scientific misconduct policy of the Spanish and Latin American journals in the JCR-Social Sciences Edition (2014). To achieve our goal, 104 selected journal instructions to authors were examined in relation to the following ethical principles: (1) the rights of people involved in the research; (2) the welfare of animals used in research; (3) conflicts of interest; and (4) publication issues. Our results suggest that publication issues such as unpublished research and the ban on simultaneous submission are the most frequently cited ethical issues. In spite of the efforts made by policy-making bodies to establish misconduct guidelines, very few journals adhere to ICMJE and COPE recommendations. Given the ethical heterogeneity evinced by our study, and by previous studies, it seems that the development of a uniform code of ethics in the field of Social Sciences may be required.

References

Angelski, C., Fernández, C.V., Weijer, C., & Gao, J. (2012). The Publication of Ethically Uncertain Research: Attitudes and Practices of Journal Editors. BMC Medical Ethics, 13(4), 1-6. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6939-13-4

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Atlas, M.C. (2003). Emerging Ethical Issues in Instructions to Authors of High-impact Biomedical Journals. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 91(4), 442-449 (http://goo.gl/A7mPQY) (14/10/2015).

Link Google Scholar

Avanzas, P., Bayes-Genis, A., Pérez, L., Sanchis, J., & Heras, M. (2011). Consideraciones éticas de la publicación de artículos científicos. Revista Española de Cardiología, 64(5), 427-429. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2011.02.006

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Baiget, T. (2010). Ética en revistas científicas. Ibersid, 4, 59-65 (http://goo.gl/3pRk1x) (2016-03-07).

Link Google Scholar

Baiget, T., & Torres-Salinas, D. (2013). Informe APEI sobre publicación en revistas científicas. Gijón: Asociación Profesional de Especialistas en Información (http://goo.gl/ZjjwOV) (2015-10-14).

Link Google Scholar

Bebeau, M.J., & Davis, E.L. (1996). Survey of Ethical Issues in Dental Research. Journal of Dental Research, 75 (2), 845-855. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00220345960750021901

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Beisiegel, U. (2010). Research Integrity and Publication Ethics. Atherosclerosis 212, 383-385. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2010.01.050

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Bosch, X., Hernández, C., Pericas, J.M., Doti, P., & Maruši?, A. (2012). Misconduct Policies in High-Impact Biomedical Journals. PloS ONE, 7(12). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051928

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Brackbill, Y., & Hellegers, A.E. (1980). Ethics and Editors. Hastings Center Report, 10(2), 20-24.

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Camargo, O. (2012). La autoría inmerecida en las publicaciones. Revista Redbioética/UNESCO, 1(5), 19-31 (http://goo.gl/OB6mRL) (2015-10-14).

Link Google Scholar

Campanario, J.M. (2003). Cómo escribir y publicar un artículo científico: cómo estudiar y aumentar su impacto. Revista española de documentación científica, 26(4), 461-463 (http://goo.gl/76bV9U) (2015-10-14).

Link Google Scholar

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (2011). Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Authors (http://goo.gl/dbru5Y) (2015-10-14).

Link Google Scholar

Delgado, E., & Ruiz, R. (2009). La comunicación y edición científica: fundamentos conceptuales. In C. García, & J. Vílchez (Coords.), Homenaje a Isabel de Torres Ramírez: estudios de documentación dedicados a su memoria (pp. 131-150). Granada: Universidad de Granada (http://goo.gl/l0Brd9) (2015-10-14).

Link Google Scholar

Delgado, E., Ruiz-Pérez, R., & Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2006). La edición de revistas científicas: directrices, criterios y modelos de evaluación. Madrid: Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología (http://goo.gl/swj8fe) (2015-10-14).

Link Google Scholar

Delgado, E., Torres-Salinas, D., & Roldán, A. (2007). El fraude en la ciencia: reflexiones a partir del caso Hwang. El Profesional de la Información, 16(2), 143-150 (http://goo.gl/Cr6L4L) (2015-10-14).

Link Google Scholar

Fonseca-Mora, M.C., Tur-Viñes, V., & Gutiérrez-San-Miguel, B. (2014). Ética y revistas científicas españolas de Comunicación, Educación y Psicología: la percepción editora. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 37(4), 1-12. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.4.1151

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

García, A.M., & Borrell, C. (2012). En defensa de Gaceta Sanitaria. Gaceta Sanitaria, 26(2), 105-106. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2012.01.004

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Giménez-Toledo, E. (2015). La evaluación de la producción científica: breve análisis crítico. Relieve, 21(1), 1-9. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7203/relieve.21.1.5160

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) (2014). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals (http://goo.gl/HQEfH5) (2015-10-14).

Link Google Scholar

Pitak, P., Bauer, U., & al. (2010). Ethical Issues in Instructions to Authors of Journals in Oral-craniomaxillofacial/facial Plastic Surgery and Related Specialities. Journal of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery, 38, 554-559. doi: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jcms.2010.02.012

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Resnik, D.B., Patrone, D., & Peddada, S. (2010). Research Misconduct Policies of Social Science Journals and Impact Factor. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance, 17(2), 79-84. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08989621003641181

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Resnik, D.B., Peddada, S., & Brunson, W. (2009). Research Misconduct Policies of Scientific Journals. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance, 16(5), 254-267. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08989620903190299

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Tavares, M.M. (2011). El peer review de las revistas científicas en Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales: políticas y prácticas editoriales declaradas. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 34(2), 141-164. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3989/redc.2011.2.796

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Tur-Viñes, V., Fonseca-Mora, M.C., & San-Miguel-Gutiérrez, B. (2013). Ética y conflictos de autoría en la publicación científica. La opinión del editor. In G. González, J. Gómez, & V. Agulló (Coords.), La colaboración científica: una aproximación multidisciplinar (pp.153-165). Valencia: Nau Llibres.

Link Google Scholar

Wager, E., Fiack, S., Graf, C., Robinson, A., & Rowlands, I. (2009). Science Journal Editors’ Views on Publication Ethics: Results of an International Survey. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35, 348-353. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2008.028324

Link DOI | Link Google Scholar

Fundref

This work has no financial support

Crossmark

Technical information

Received: 03-11-2015

Revised: 15-12-2015

Accepted: 22-02-2016

OnlineFirst: 15-05-2016

Publication date: 01-07-2016

Article revision time: 42 days | Average time revision issue 48: 29 days

Article acceptance time: 111 days | Average time of acceptance issue 48: 73 days

Preprint editing time: 195 days | Average editing time preprint issue 48: 157 days

Article editing time: 240 days | Average editing time issue 48: 202 days

Metrics

Metrics of this article

Views: 27453

Abstract readings: 22264

PDF downloads: 5189

Full metrics of Comunicar 48

Views: 434031

Abstract readings: 310911

PDF downloads: 123120

Cited by