World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 30, Issue 8, pp 1374–1376 | Cite as

Ethical Misconduct in Publishing: the Editors’ Perspective

  • Michael G. SarrEmail author
  • Andrew L. Warshaw

Scientific publishing is a respected product of our profession. Its success is based on the assumption by editors and the readership of scientific journals that data presented are accurate, that the publication is based on the author’s work, and that it is a primary publication. Albeit rare, ethical misconduct in published scientific works does occur, which breeds mistrust of the academician and represents a major headache to editors. This short piece will address certain forms of ethical misconduct—duplicate publication, plagiarism, and false data.

The drivers for publication misconduct are fairly evident. “Publish or perish” is the often-quoted mantra of the ivory-tower-based academic surgeon or physician. Publication is perceived to be the propellant for promotion, recognition, and office appointments in local and national organizations, associations, and societies. In rare situations, especially in young investigators, ignorance of the guidelines of ethical publication practices...


Journal Editor Medical Journal Editor False Data Fraudulent Action Scientific Readership 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Surgical Journal Editors. Consensus statement on submission and publication. Surgery 2001;129:662–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Surgical Journal Editors. Joint policy statement of the surgical journal editors on scientific data from clinical trials: investigators’ responsibilities and rights. Surgery 2002;131:591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Committee on Publication Ethics, Br J Surg 2000;87: 265Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lundberg GD. Statement by the International Committee of Medical Editors on duplicate or redundant publication. J Am Med Assoc 1993;270:2495Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schein M, Paladugu R. Redundant surgical publications: tip of the iceberg Surgery 2001;129:655–661PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stearns L. Copy wrong: Plagiarism, process, property, and the law. In: Buranen L, Roy AM, editors. Perspectives on plagiarism and intellectual property in a postmodern World. State University of New York Press, Albany, 1999; pp 5–18Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Skandalakis JE, Mirilas P. Plagiarism. Arch Surg 2004;139:1022–1024PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Gastroenterology Research Unit (AL2-435)Mayo Clinic College of MedicineRochesterUSA
  2. 2.Harvard Medical SchoolMassachusetts General HospitalBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations