Publication Ethics

Abstract

Literature reviews provide important evidence for practice. Yet review authors must guard against several ethical concerns including plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, and piecemeal publication. Editors have tools that ensure the originality of manuscripts showing the percentage of narrative that is duplicated. Sage Publication journals including The Journal of School Nursing (JOSN) use software called iThenicate (Version: 2.0.8). Reviewers, who are content and clinical experts, support the effort that literature reviews and the research reported in reviews meet the ethical standard of originality. Plagiarism and self-plagiarism are the use of previously published narrative even that of the author’s publications (American Psychological Association, 2010). While authors feel ownership of their own work, publication ethics dictate that manuscripts are original and duplication of previously published work is not allowed. The availability of publications through the Internet expands the availability of published work for review. A useful strategy to avoid plagiarism in literature reviews is to compose narrative from a conceptually developed review matrix or table that provides for synthesis of the research. The tables presented by authors in this issue provide examples of various conceptual approaches to literature reviews. Duplicate publication is the publication of results in multiple journals. Authors may feel that the results of their work should be published in several journals for different audiences. Publication ethics disallow duplicate publication (American Psychological Association, 2010) and with broad availability of publications through the Internet, concern for different audiences is not a valid argument. The challenge for authors is to write for all audiences in a way that does not limit the scientific quality of the report but translates scientific writing for clinical readers. Piecemeal publication is the excessive publication of limited elements of results in multiple publications (American Psychological Association, 2010). Publication ethical guidelines suggest that in some cases, such as longitudinal studies, multiple reports of results are allowed since dissemination of time specific outcomes inform continued research and practice (American Psychological Association, 2010). Most studies warrant multiple publications. For example, a literature review of the problem can result in a comprehensive manuscript, outlining gaps in research and directions for advancing research addressing the problem. Manuscripts reporting methodologies are another unique element of research and some journals accept papers that report protocols. The brief research report is such a vehicle for JOSN (http://journals.sagepub.com/home/jsn). Both literature review manuscripts and brief research reports provide a method to publish throughout the time of a study. Outcome reporting is another acceptable manuscript for a study that would cite the literature review and protocol publications rather than duplicating them. Secondary data analysis should address problem statements and purposes that are different from the original study. The important point to remember is that each of the manuscripts described would be anchored by distinct literature reviews. Deliberate plagiarism is rare (Wager, Fiack, Graf, Robinson, & Rowlands, 2009), but careless use of the literature in manuscript development can lead to problems. There are a number of strategies that enhance the originality of manuscripts and limit ethical problems in publication. Outlining the intended manuscripts at the beginning of a study allows for careful planning so that unique features of the study advance the science over time. Reporting the results of a literature review may contribute to duplication while the synthesis of literature limits duplication. Purpose statements for each manuscript should be unique. Probably, the most important step in maximizing the originality of a manuscript is to turn off the ‘‘copy and paste’’ functions of the computer.