campus_cribsheets_a3_2pp.

qxd 09/04/2015 15:47 Page 2

Research and publishing ethics How to review manuscripts

Authorship, plagiarism and responsibilities Peer review, your role and responsibilities

What does it mean to be an author? What is plagiarism and how is it detected? Peer review Your ultimate checklist for reviewing a paper
…is critical because it First impressions Results and discussion
An “author” is generally considered to Plagiarism is the appropriation of Improves the quality of the published paper
Is the research original, novel and Suggest improvements in the way
be someone who has made substantive another person’s ideas, processes, Ensures previous work is acknowledged important to the field? data is shown
intellectual contributions to a published or words without giving appropriate Determines the importance of findings Has the appropriate structure and Comment on general logic and
study. credit, including those obtained through Detects plagiarism and fraud language been used? on justification of interpretations
and conclusions
confidential review of others’ research Plays a central role in academic career development
Remember Abstract Comment on the number of
Being an author comes with credit but also responsibility proposals and manuscripts. Is it really a summary?
figures, tables and schemes
Federal Office of Science and Technology Policy, 1999
...adheres to the principles that Write concisely and precisely
Decisions about who will be an author and the order of It is a well understood concept Does it include key findings?
which changes you recommend
authors should be made before starting to write up the Is it an appropriate length?
paper CrossCheck is a huge database Without it there is no control in scientific List separately suggested changes
of 30+ million articles, from communication in style, grammar and other small
50,000+ journals, from 400+ Journal editors evaluate and reject certain articles Introduction changes
Types of authorship publishers. prior to external peer review Is it effective, clear and well Suggest additional experiments
The software alerts editors to organized? or analyses
First author: the person who conducts or supervises the data any similarities between your Does it really introduce and put Make clear the need for
collection, analysis, presentation and interpretation of the
Why should you review? into perspective what follows? changes/updates
article and the huge database of published articles.
results and also puts together the paper for submission Suggest changes in organization Ask yourself whether the
Many Elsevier journals now check every submitted article
Co-author: makes intellectual contributions to the data and point authors to appropriate manuscript should be published
using CrossCheck.
analysis and contributes to data interpretation, reviews each citations. at all
paper draft, must be able to present the results, defend the Be specific – don’t write “the
implications and discuss study limitations Work that can be plagiarised includes… authors have done a poor job” Conclusion
Words (language) Computer programs Lectures Comment on importance,
Avoid ghost authorship: excluding authors who Ideas Diagrams Printed material
Methodology validity and generality of
participated in the work Findings Graphs Electronic material
conclusions
Avoid scientific writers and gift authors: including Writings Illustrations Any other original Updated with latest Can a colleague reproduce the
developments
Graphic representations Information work experiments and get the same Request toning down of
authors who did not contribute to the work
Helps with outcomes? unjustified claims and
Career generalizations
Correct citation is key own research
or new ideas development Did the authors include proper
What happens when there is a dispute? Academic duty references to previously published Request removal of redundancies
It must be resolved by authors Awareness of new research methodology? and summaries
GIVE before their peers
Editors cannot adjudicate or act as judge Declare conflicts of interest Is the description of new The abstract, not the conclusion,
It delays publication as the editor has to get
General interest methodology accurate? summarizes the study
in the area
agreement from all authors about any changes Conflicts of interest can take many forms: Could or should the authors have
Builds association with included supplementary material?
After publication it can be published as a Direct financial: employment, stock ownership, grants, journals and editors References, tables and figures
correction but needs agreement from all patents Check accuracy, number
TAKE and citation appropriateness
authors with justification Indirect financial: honoraria, consultancies, mutual fund
ownership, expert testimony Comment on any footnotes
Career and intellectual: promotion, direct rival institutional Comment on figures, their
Key author responsibilities
quality and readability
Personal belief
Editors’ view: what makes a good reviewer? Assess completeness of legends,
Authorship: headers and axis labels
Report only real, unfabricated data
The consequences Provides a thorough and comprehensive report Check presentation consistency
Originality
Submits the report on time Comment on need for colour in
Declare any conflicts of interest Consequences vary depending on the misconduct and the figures
journal, institutions, and funding bodies involved. Provides well-founded comments for authors
Submit to one journal at a time
Gives constructive criticism
Avoid: Authors could: Demonstrates objectivity
Fabrication: making up research data Have articles retracted (carrying a note why they were
Provides a clear recommendation to the editor
Falsification: manipulation of existing retracted, e.g. for plagiarism)
research data Have letters of concern or reprimand written to them
Plagiarism: previous work taken and Institutes and funding bodies could carry out disciplinary Comments to the editor
passed off as one’s own action
1 Comment on novelty and
significance 2 Recommend whether the manuscript
is suitable for publication 3 Confidential comments will not
be disclosed to the author(s)

publishingcampus.com publishingcampus.com