Publishing with Integrity

Publishers often prohibit editors and peer reviewers from uploading submitted manuscripts to generative AI systems. They cite confidentiality, copyright, intellectual property and data privacy. Yet the authors may already have uploaded the same manuscript to an AI platform before submitting it. Rather than relying on ...

Authors are expected to respond carefully to every peer-review comment they receive. Yet they are rarely told who actually produced the report, whether artificial intelligence was used, whether the reviewer had a conflict of interest or whether the manuscript received more than a superficial reading. ...

Your co-author has been accused of research misconduct. Perhaps the allegation concerns a paper you wrote together. Perhaps it relates to an entirely different project. Either way, an uncomfortable question arises: what does this mean for you? Authorship brings recognition, reputation and career advancement, but ...

In June 2026, twelve journals were discontinued in Scopus. This decision directly affects the journals, but what does it mean for authors who have already published, submitted a manuscript, received an acceptance or paid an article processing charge? ...

A Scopus extract (6 July 2026) identified authors who had published more than one article every day in 2026. That raises an obvious question, how can anyone publish at that rate? This edition looks beyond the headline numbers and asks what publication counts really tell ...

Researchers write papers, review manuscripts, edit journals and contribute their expertise. This is largely done for free. But what if that unpaid work is now helping to build commercial AI systems? This edition asks whether researchers are inadvertently becoming an unpaid workforce for the AI ...