Publishing with Integrity

Should researchers who repeatedly have papers retracted be prevented from publishing again? If so, who should decide, for how long, and what safeguards would be needed to ensure that innocent researchers are not unfairly penalised? ...

We regularly talk about predatory journals, but are there also predatory universities? Can an institution be legally recognised, have accredited programmes and award legitimate qualifications, yet still engage in practices that undermine academic integrity? Perhaps we need to look beyond accreditation and examine how universities ...

An author may use AI to assess a manuscript before submission, while a reviewer may be prohibited from uploading the same paper to the same service. There is a reasonable explanation, but conflicting guidance makes the boundary harder to navigate. ...

Journals sometimes tell us when a paper was submitted, revised, accepted and published, but we rarely see how the author list changed along the way. Should readers be able to see who was added or removed, when the change happened and why? ...

You did not handle the submission, choose the reviewers or accept the paper. But you are now the Editor-in-Chief. When an integrity concern emerges from the journal's past, who is responsible for dealing with it? ...

A retraction changes the status of one paper. But research does not exist in isolation. Other papers may have cited it, relied on its data, adopted its methods or incorporated its findings into systematic reviews. So what happens to that downstream research when the original ...