Publishing with Integrity

Peer review is one of the foundations of scholarly publishing. Every year, researchers contribute millions of hours reviewing manuscripts, usually without payment and often with little recognition. As publishing evolves, including the increasing use of AI, a question emerges: who owns those review reports, and ...

Open access was intended to remove barriers to knowledge by making research freely available to readers. Yet as article processing charges continue to rise, an uncomfortable question emerges: have we simply moved the paywall from one side of scholarly publishing to the other? This edition ...

Plagiarism detection software was developed to help identify copied work and protect academic integrity. Yet the same tools can now be used to modify text until it falls below an acceptable similarity threshold. Have plagiarism detectors now become plagiarism enablers? This edition explores an uncomfortable ...

A Google Scholar profile recently increased its h-index by 95 points in a single month while also accumulating almost half a million additional citations. Whether this particular case represents manipulation, a technical anomaly, or something else, it raises concerns about one of academia's most widely ...

Most publishers require authors to declare the use of AI, which is stated as part of the article. Yet publishers may already be using AI throughout editorial and publication workflows, often with little or no disclosure, certainly not at the level of an individual article. ...

Self-citation is not automatically unethical. In many cases, it is necessary and academically appropriate. However, once citations become tied to promotion, funding, rankings and reputation, incentives inevitably emerge. Researchers begin learning how the system works and, in some cases, how it can be optimised. This ...