CEPI5215 Chap.1 Research Integrity and Publication Ethics
Research Integrity and Publication Ethics
Research integrity governs the full publication record, not only obvious misconduct. This chapter connects responsible conduct and governance with plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, authorship, duplicate publication and conflicts of interest. Its central method is to separate observable facts, policy tests and the action needed to protect participants, collaborators and readers.
The worked practice uses an authorship dispute because credit and accountability must be resolved before a manuscript is submitted. The chapter also separates an integrity concern from a finding of misconduct. That distinction matters because a responsible first response preserves evidence, protects confidentiality and sends the concern to an authorised process instead of replacing investigation with accusation.
What this chapter covers
- 01
Research governance and the responsibilities that continue from study approval into publication
- 02
Plagiarism, attribution and transparent reuse of earlier work
- 03
Fabrication and falsification as distinct forms of record distortion
- 04
Authorship criteria, acknowledgements and accountability for the final paper
- 05
Duplicate publication, overlapping reports and disclosure to editors
- 06
Financial and non-financial conflicts of interest and their management
Worked example · free
Resolve an authorship claim before submission
- +1Compare each proposed author with the applicable contribution, approval and accountability criteria.
- +1Document actual contributions and invite the colleague to make a qualifying contribution if time and policy permit.
- +1Use acknowledgement, with permission, for support that does not meet authorship requirements.
- +1Obtain agreement on the author list and final manuscript before submission and escalate unresolved pressure through proper governance.
Key terms
- Research governance
- The policies, roles and oversight processes that make research lawful, ethical, safe and accountable.
- Plagiarism
- Unacknowledged presentation of another person’s words, ideas or work, including misleading reuse.
- Fabrication
- Creation of data or observations that did not occur.
- Falsification
- Manipulation or omission that misrepresents research materials, processes or results.
- Authorship
- Publication credit paired with qualifying contribution, final approval and accountability.
- Conflict of interest
- An interest that could influence, or appear to influence, professional judgment.
Research Integrity and Publication Ethics FAQ
Is plagiarism limited to copied sentences?
No. It can involve words, ideas, structure, images or data presented without appropriate acknowledgement. Editing a few words does not repair missing attribution, and reuse of your own published text may also require transparent citation and permission.
How is fabrication different from falsification?
Fabrication creates research data or observations that never existed. Falsification alters materials, processes, analysis or reporting so that the record becomes inaccurate. Both undermine trust, but identifying the mechanism helps determine what records and procedures need investigation.
Does disclosure remove a conflict of interest?
Disclosure makes a relevant interest visible; it does not automatically remove its influence. Editors and institutions may require management, independent review, role changes or recusal. The key is to disclose early enough for an authorised person to decide.
Can a department head be an author automatically?
No. Position, supervision or access to resources does not automatically satisfy authorship criteria. Apply the same contribution, approval and accountability requirements to everyone, document the discussion and use acknowledgement for support that does not qualify.
What should happen when duplicate publication is suspected?
Compare the papers and disclosures, preserve the relevant records and notify the appropriate editor or institution through established procedure. Overlap can have legitimate explanations, but readers and editors need transparent cross-reference rather than concealed reuse.
Why is accountability part of authorship?
Authorship communicates more than credit. Readers and editors need identifiable people who approve the published version, can explain their contributions and will help address questions about accuracy or integrity. Contribution without final approval leaves that responsibility incomplete.
What is the difference between correction and retraction?
A correction repairs a defined error while preserving a publication whose central record remains reliable. Retraction alerts readers that the paper as a whole cannot be relied upon. Editors determine the appropriate notice after assessing scope, cause and effect; authors should disclose errors promptly rather than choose a remedy privately.
Assessment move
Build a one-page decision grid with the integrity issue, the factual evidence needed, the governing principle, the responsible decision-maker and the protective action. Practise on ambiguous cases, because many publication problems are not solved by labelling a person dishonest. For authorship, list contributions, approval and accountability separately.
For suspected plagiarism or data distortion, preserve records and follow institutional or journal procedures rather than confronting publicly. When a conflict appears, distinguish disclosure from management. End every practice response by naming what must be documented before publication can proceed.
Keep the publication timeline visible: approval, data custody, analysis, drafting, author agreement, submission and post-publication correction create different responsibilities. When facts are incomplete, write the factual question that must be answered and avoid guessing motive. Practise explaining why acknowledgement, disclosure, correction and investigation solve different problems.
This makes an integrity response proportionate as well as firm.
