SpringerLink
Log in

Ethical and Legal Issues in Publication and Dissemination of Scholarly Knowledge: A Summary of the Published Evidence

  • Published:
Journal of Academic Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research publication and dissemination of scholarly knowledge in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are among the most influential roles of many academic scholars in both industrialised and develo** nations, but such experience and skills are rarely taught, transferred and shared in the real world. Dealing with issues of research misconduct might be challenging as well as learning opportunities for new academics while conducting research and scholarship teaching and publication in HEIs. In this review paper, I will discuss some concepts of research misconduct, highlighting some relevant ethical and legal concerns in publication. This paper concludes that continued education and support on ethical research to graduates and scholars might help to prevent research misconduct related to publications and dissemination through develo** appropriate strategies in practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbasi, K. (2010a). The CNEP trial: how a good trial was turned rotten. Journal of Royal Society of Medicine, 103(4), 120–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abbasi, K. (2010b). MMR, climate change, and orthopaedics: a bad month for peer review. Journal of Royal Society of Medicine, 103, 77–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Marzouki, S., Roberts, I., Marshall, T., et al. (2005). The effect of scientific misconduct on the results of clinical trials: a Delphi survey. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 26(3), 331–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aloni, N. (2008). The fundamental commitments of educators. Ethics and Education, 3(2), 149–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association (APA). (2001). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. Washington: APA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baysal, B. (2007). Publication ethics and bioscience. Conference proceedings, pp. 10–28. Turkey.

  • Benos, D. J., Fabres, J., Farmer, J., Gutierrez, J. P., Hennessy, K., et al. (2005). Ethics and scientific publication. Advanced Physiological Education, 29, 271–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brannen, J. (1992). Mixing methods: qualitative and quantitative research. Aldershot: Avebury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkhardt, M. A., & Nathaniel, A. K. (1998). Ethics and issues in contemporary nursing. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, D. (2009). Cut out plagiarism. Nursing Standard, 23(25), 61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, P. (2010). Peer review faces web review. International Herald Tribune (The global edition of the New York Times), 25 August, p.1.

  • Cohen, K. J., & Esmail, L. C. (2007). Scientific misconduct, the pharmaceutical industry, and the tragedy of institutions. Medicine and Law, 26(3), 431–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coultas, D. (2007). Ethical considerations in the interpretations and communication of clinical trial results. Proceedings of the American Thoracic Society, 4(2), 194–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Biology Editors. (1990). Ethics and policy in scientific publication. Maryland: Council of Biology Editors.

  • Christensen, N. B., & Kishida, T. (2009). How to address publication ethics. International Journal of Urology, 17(1), 2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crittenden, V. L., Hanna, R. C., & Peterson, R. A. (2009). The cheating culture: a global societal phenomenon. Business Horizons, 52(4), 337–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cushman, R. (2007). Ethics terms and terminology: a brief glossary and guide to the ethics. Miami: University of Miami.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, M., Sheard, J., Bareiss, C., Carter, J., Joyce, D., Harding, T., & Laxer, C. (2003). Addressing student cheating: definitions and solutions. ACD SIGCSE Bulletin, 35, 172–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, P. J. (1990). Correcting the literature following fraudulent publication. American Journal of Medical Association, 263, 1416–1419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Girard, N. (2004). Plagiarism: an ethical problem in the writing world. Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses Journal, 80, 13–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graf, C., Wager, E., Bowman, A., Fiack, S., Scott-Lichter, D., & Robinson, A. (2007). Best practice guidelines on publication ethics: a publisher’s perspective. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 61(Suppl. 152), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grieger, M. C. (1992). Ghost writers and commerce of scientific papers on the internet: science at risk. Revista da Assoicacao Medica Brasileira, 53(3), 247–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. M. (2006). Australia needs an office of academic integrity. Medical Journal of Australia, 185(11–12), 619–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemmings, B., Rushbook, P., & Smith, E. (2005). To publish or not to publish: that is the question? Learned Publishing, 18, 63–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hrabak, M., Vujaklija, A., Vodopivec, I., Hren, D., Marusic, M., & Marusic, A. (2004). Academic misconduct among medical students in a postcommunist country. Medical Education, 38, 276–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. M. (2000). Ethics in publication: are we practicing to the highest possible standards? (editorial). British Journal of Anaesthesia, 85(3), 340–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huth, E. (2009). The move toward setting scientific standards for the content of medical review articles. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 102, 247–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of Medical Editors. (2006). Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Annals of Internal Medicine, 126, 36–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A. H., & McLellan, F. (2000). Ethics in biomedical publication. Baltimore: John Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, I., & Farthing, M. (2010). Mis-investigating alleged research misconduct can dire consequences and regulating research, regulating professionals (letters). Journal of Royal Society of Medicine, 103(6), 213–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjellstrom, S., Ross, S. N., & Fridlund, B. (2010). Research ethics in dissertations: ethical issues and complexity of reasoning. Journal of Medical Ethics, 36, 425–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, A. (1994). Publication of research: the ethical dimension. Journal of Dental Research, 73(11), 1778–1782.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., & de Vries, R. (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature, 435, 737–738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, D. (2002). Stealing of words. American Journal of Nursing, 102(2), 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. (2004). Plagiarism: policy against cheating or policy for learning? Available at: http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/ (accessed on 22/7/2010).

  • Mays, N., Pope, C., & Popay, J. (2005). Systematic reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence to inform management and policy-making in the health care. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 10(Supp1), 1–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCuen, R. H. (2008). The plagiarism decision process: the role of pressure and rationalisation. IEEE Transactions on Education, 51, 152–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medical Research Council of Canada. (1987). Guidelines on research involving human subjects. Ottawa: Medical Research Council of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meltzoff, J. (2005). Ethics in publication. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma, 11(3), 337–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, N., Juillet, Y., & Bertoye, P. (2007). Integrity of scientific data: transparency of clinical trial data. Therapie, 62(3), 211–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, E., Dingwall, R., Greatbath, D., Parker, S., & Watson, P. (1998). Qualitative research methods in health technology: a review of the literature. Health Technology Assessment, 2, 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nejati, M., Jamali, R., & Nejati, M. (2009). Students’ ethical bevahour in Iran. Journal of Academic Ethics, 7, 227–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social research methods: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neville, C. (2010). The complete guide to referencing and avoiding plagiarism. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newstrorm, J., & Ruch, W. (1976). The ethics of business students: preparation for a career. AACSB Bulletin, 12(3), 21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, I., & Griffiths, P. (2008). Duplicate publication and ‘salami slicing’: ethical issues and practical solutions (editorial). International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45, 1257–1260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Office of Research Integrity. (2000). Managing allegations of scientific misconduct: a guidance document for editors. US: Office of Research Integrity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pass, S., & Willingham, W. (2009). Teaching ethics to high school students. The social studies (ERIC document Reproduction Service No. EJ822557).

  • Poff, D. (2009). Reflection of ethics in journal publications. Journal of Academic Ethics, 7, 51–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, D., & Gunsalus, C. K. (1993). Scientific misconduct: new definition, procedures and office- perhaps a new leaf. Journal of American Medical Association., 269, 915–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, D., & Gunsalus, C. K. (2008). What is research misconduct? In F. Wells & M. Farthing (Eds.), Fraud and misconduct in biomedical research (pp. 29–51). London: Royal Society of Medicine Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resta, R. G., Veach, P. M., Charles, S., Vogel, K., Blase, T., & Palmer, C. G. (2010). Publishing a Master’s thesis: a guide for novice authors. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 19, 217–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richman, K. A., & Alexander, L. B. (2006). Ethics and research with undergraduates. Ethics and Education, 1(2), 163–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riss, P. (2008). The concept of scientific dishonesty: ethics, value, systems, research. In F. Wells & M. Farthing (Eds.), Fraud and misconduct in biomedical research (pp. 3–13). London: Royal Society of Medicine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J., & Schena, D. (2008). Peer review and the Journal of Sexual Medicine: management and collaborative effort (editorial). Journal of Sexual Medicine, 5(5), 1029–1032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, R., & Savulescu, J. (2008). Research ethics and lessons from Hwanggate: what can we learn from Korean cloning fraud? Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(3), 214–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scanes, C. G. (2007). Ethics of publication: Is publication an obligation for researchers? (editorial). Poultry Science, 86, 2051–2052.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott-Lichter, D., & the Editorial Policy Committee, Council of Editors. (2009). CSE’s white paper on promoting integrity in scientific journal publications. Va: Reston.

  • Sharp, D. W. (1991). Fraud: The journal’s role concerning fraudulent research. Investigative Radiology, 26, 586–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheikh, A. (2000). Publication ethics and the research assessment exercise: reflections on the troubled question of authorship. Journal of Medical Ethics, 26, 422–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheard, J., Markham, S., & Duck, M. (2003). Investigating differences in cheating behaviours of IT undergraduate and graduate students: the maturity and motivational factors. Higher Education Research and Development, 22(1), 91–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siedlecki, S., Montague, M., & Schultz, J. (2008). Writing for publication: avoiding common ethical pitfalls. Journal of Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurse, 35(2), 147–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, A. A., & Rocha, M. F. (2008). Academic cheating in Spain and Portugal: An empirical explanation. International Journal of Iberian Studies, 21, 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, A. A., & Rocha, M. F. (2010a). Cheating by economics and business undergraduate students: an exploratory international assessment. Higher Education, 59, 663–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, A. A., & Rocha, M. F. (2010b). Academic cheating in Spain and Portugal: an empirical explanation. International Journal of Iberian Studies, 21(1), 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vojak, C. (2006). What market culture teaches students about ethical behaviour. Ethics and Education, 1(2), 177–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wager, E. (2007). Ethical publishing: the innocent author’s guide to avoiding miscount. Menopause International, 13(3), 98–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wehmeier, S., McIntosh, C., Turnbull, J., & Ashby, M. (2005). Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary of current English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, F., & Farthing, M. (2008). Fraud and misconduct in biomedical research. London: RSM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yankauer, A. (1978). Editor’s report (editorial). American Journal of Public Health, 68, 220–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Grateful thanks to Barbara Goodfellow and Dr Fiona McGowan, University of East London UK, for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Health & Bioscience, University of East London, London, W15 4LZ, UK

    Krishna Regmi

Authors
  1. Krishna Regmi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Krishna Regmi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Regmi, K. Ethical and Legal Issues in Publication and Dissemination of Scholarly Knowledge: A Summary of the Published Evidence. J Acad Ethics 9, 71–81 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-011-9133-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-011-9133-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation