Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Is Ethics in Scientific Publishing Still Alive?
“Publish or perish.” It’s a phrase many researchers know all too well, and one that has, over time, blurred the line between academic achievement and ethical compromise.
In theory, every reputable journal today claims to uphold strong “publication ethics.” In practice, however, those same ethical commitments often feel like checkboxes rather than real guardrails. From questionable authorship practices to the rise of AI in writing and reviewing, the cracks in our publishing systems are becoming harder to ignore.
Let’s unpack what’s really happening and why it matters more than ever.
Who Deserves to Be an Author?
Authorship should be simple: if you meaningfully contributed to a paper, your name belongs on it. But in reality, many early-career researchers find themselves doing most of the work while senior academics take the spotlight. Sometimes names are added as favors. Sometimes they’re omitted entirely.
This “gift authorship” culture not only erodes fairness but also raises serious questions about accountability and recognition. If authorship becomes a tool for academic politics rather than an honest reflection of contribution, what happens to integrity? International Committee of Medical Journal Editors – ICMJE provides detailed authorship criteria, but adoption and enforcement vary widely.
Double Submissions and Data Games
Submitting the same paper to multiple journals? Rewording an old paper to get it published again? Or worse, adjusting data to make it look more “interesting”? These are more common than we’d like to admit.
Even if they seem like shortcuts, they damage the trust that science is built on. Ethical publishing means valuing the truth over publication counts, even when results are inconclusive, messy, or unexciting.
Organizations like COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) offer clear guidance on redundant publication and data integrity(COPE flowcharts, 2019), but enforcement still depends heavily on journal leadership and reviewer vigilance.
Editors and Reviewers: The Real Gatekeepers
Behind every published paper is a team of editors and reviewers. Their job isn’t just to judge scientific merit, it’s to safeguard the ethics of publishing itself.
But when peer reviews are delayed for months, filled with vague comments, or influenced by personal bias, the system falters. Fairness in review, conflict-of-interest checks, timely responses, and these may seem small, but they’re crucial for building a respectful, equitable publishing environment. The World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE), and Council of Science Editors (CSE), provide editorial guidelines, training, and case studies to support ethical review practices and editor accountabilityeach tailored to their global or regional audiences.
AI Tools: Boon or Ethical Minefield?
Enter AI. Tools like large language models can now draft papers, suggest revisions, and even assist in peer review. Cool? Definitely. But also concerning.
Some questions we urgently need to address:
- Should authors disclose if AI helped write their manuscript?
- Can AI be listed as a “co-author”?
- If a biased algorithm misguides the review process, who’s to blame?
Nature’s 2023 editorial “Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules” set a precedent, urging transparency in AI use while clarifying that AI tools cannot be credited as authors.
Without clear policies, we risk drifting into a gray zone where human responsibility is replaced by digital ambiguity. If left unchecked, AI could deepen inequities, spread misinformation, and undermine trust in science.
Beyond Tick-Boxes: Building a Culture of Ethics
Ethics isn’t something you “add” to research at the end it’s something you live by from day one. That means going beyond policies and workshops. It means helping students, reviewers, and editors understand why ethical practices matter, not just what they are.
Integrity can’t be enforced with forms; it must be cultivated as a mindset. Global training initiatives by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI), EMBO Research Integrity Courses, and ACSE’s training platform provide strong foundations. Still, they must be integrated deeply into institutional and editorial cultures.
Final Thoughts
At its best, scientific publishing reflects humanity’s pursuit of truth. But when that pursuit is clouded by shortcuts, competition, or neglect, the very purpose of research gets lost.
So let’s rethink the questions we ask. Not “Which journal publishes fastest?” or “Which one is cheapest?” but “Which journal respects the work, and the people behind it?”
If we want science to thrive, ethics can’t be an afterthought. It must be the foundation. And everyone, from students to editors, has a part to play in protecting that foundation. Let’s keep the conversation going. Because the future of science depends on more than just discovery, it depends on how we choose to share it.
Keywords
Publication Ethics Scientific Integrity Authorship Misconduct Peer Review Ethics Duplicate Submission Research Transparency Editorial Responsibility AI in Scientific Publishing Academic Honesty Research Misconduct
Mr. Iman Elahi is an Urban Design Engineer at Masir Gostar Shargh based in Mashhad, Iran. He holds a Bachelor of Science in Urban Engineering from the Islamic Azad University, Mashhad. With a strong foundation in urban planning and design, Mr. Elahi contributes to projects focused on sustainable urban development and infrastructure enhancement in the region. He is also an active Ambassador of the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE), supporting regional engagement and scholarly collaboration.
View All Posts by Iman Elahi
