Scientific Misconduct Problems and Responsibilities of Journals Martin

Scientific Misconduct Problems and Responsibilities of Journals Martin Blume The American Physical Society

Obvious Observations • It is impossible to screen every submission fully for misconduct. • Vigilance on the part of editors and referees is, however, necessary. • Allegations of misconduct must be taken seriously and investigated carefully. • Those accused must be given an opportunity to defend themselves, and their rights to confidentiality and careful judgment protected.

Scientific Misconduct: Most Common Types • • • Failure to refer and plagiarism Fabrication of data Authorship disputes Duplicate submission/publication Referee misconduct Conflict of interest

Who Should Investigate? • Journals (plagiarism, duplicate submission/publication, referee misconduct). • Institutions (authorship, fabrication of data, conflict of interest). • Government agencies and scientific societies. • Courts (to be avoided!).

Who should impose punishment? • • • Institutions? Societies? Government agencies? Publishers? Courts? What should the punishment be? (Obviously this depends on the nature and severity of the offense).

Desired outcome of this workshop • A document that summarizes the responsibilities of the various players. • Endorsement of that document by the IUPAP Working Group on Communication in Physics and ultimately by the IUPAP Council.