II. Procedures for Ethics Investigations
A. Publication Ethical Standards Subcommittee-Led Investigations
1. Receipt of Complaint
Complaints of plagiarism or other publication ethical violations may be brought to the Subcommittee by an author, an editor, a reviewer, or any other party who believes that misrepresentation or wrongdoing has occurred.
All complaints must be accompanied by evidence of the alleged wrongdoing. For allegations of plagiarism, for example, the following documentation would be required:
a. Copies of both the original document and the alleged plagiarized version, with relevant passages highlighted.
b. Full publication details of both documents.
c. A written description of the alleged violation.
d. Copies of any communications the complainant may already have had with the accused author(s).
2. Investigation
The Subcommittee then follows these procedures:
a. They evaluate the evidence submitted to make an initial determination of the validity of the complaint. If they believe that more evidence is required, they will notify the complainant of that need.
b. If the complaint appears to be valid and the evidence is complete, the Subcommittee drafts a letter to the accused author informing him/her of the complaint and requesting a response, including an explanation of any special circumstances. The letter is signed by the Vice President–Publications, and a deadline is given for a response by the author (generally four–six weeks).
c. If the author responds, the Subcommittee considers the content of that response before making a final determination in the case. This evaluation may also include additional communication with the complainant. If the author does not respond, the Subcommittee proceeds without his/her input.
d. If the Subcommittee concludes that the original complaint was valid, they draft a letter (to be signed by the Vice President–Publications) informing the author of their findings and notifying him/her of the consequences (as outl
II. Procedures for Ethics Investigations
A. Publication Ethical Standards Subcommittee-Led Investigations
1. Receipt of Complaint
Complaints of plagiarism or other publication ethical violations may be brought to the Subcommittee by an author, an editor, a reviewer, or any other party who believes that misrepresentation or wrongdoing has occurred.
All complaints must be accompanied by evidence of the alleged wrongdoing. For allegations of plagiarism, for example, the following documentation would be required:
a. Copies of both the original document and the alleged plagiarized version, with relevant passages highlighted.
b. Full publication details of both documents.
c. A written description of the alleged violation.
d. Copies of any communications the complainant may already have had with the accused author(s).
2. Investigation
The Subcommittee then follows these procedures:
a. They evaluate the evidence submitted to make an initial determination of the validity of the complaint. If they believe that more evidence is required, they will notify the complainant of that need.
b. If the complaint appears to be valid and the evidence is complete, the Subcommittee drafts a letter to the accused author informing him/her of the complaint and requesting a response, including an explanation of any special circumstances. The letter is signed by the Vice President–Publications, and a deadline is given for a response by the author (generally four–six weeks).
c. If the author responds, the Subcommittee considers the content of that response before making a final determination in the case. This evaluation may also include additional communication with the complainant. If the author does not respond, the Subcommittee proceeds without his/her input.
d. If the Subcommittee concludes that the original complaint was valid, they draft a letter (to be signed by the Vice President–Publications) informing the author of their findings and notifying him/her of the consequences (as outlined in Section I.B). If the Subcommittee finds the original complaint to be invalid, they draft a letter so informing the author. At the same time, they notify the complainant of the final resolution of the case.
3. Appeals by the Author
If, after the resolution of the case by the Subcommittee, the author appeals the decision, the Subcommittee may revisit the procedures followed and decisions made. They may choose to take no further action if their original findings are validated by the review. If there is any question, however, of either validity or bias, then the Subcommittee may refer the appeal (along with all related documents and correspondence) to the Vice President–Publications for final review and disposition.
B. Editor-Led Investigations
1. Pre- or Post-Publication
Because violations falling in this category are generally a result of authors making false statements during the submittal process, and those statements are fully documented, formal investigations are seldom required. All authors are required to verify items such as valid authorship, copyright, manuscript history, etc., at the time of submission. If the Editor knows any of these verifications to be false, then he/she may immediately invoke any of the sanctions described in Section I.C. If suspected violations are not discovered by the Editor until a manuscript has already been published, the Editor can still apply the same sanctions as in Section I.C. The Editor always has the right to request additional actions by the Publication Ethical Standards Subcommittee and/or the Vice President–Publications.
2. Appeals by the Author
If, after a decision by the Editor, the author wishes to appeal the decision, the Editor shall review his decision with the author. If the author then wishes a further review of the decision, he may appeal to the Vice President–Publications for a final review and disposition.
