JANINE S. MACANANG-Double Publication and Forum Shopping.pdf

UNETHICAL PRACTICE IN CONDUCTING RESEARCH

1. Janine S. Macanang
Presenter

2. OUTLINE
DOUBLE PUBLICATION
FORUM SHOPPING

3. OBJECTIVES
•Define double publication and forum shopping.
•Give examples of double publication and forum shopping.
•Discuss the consequences of the two different ethical issues.
•Appreciate the importance of learning ethical issues in
research,

4. DOUBLE PUBLICATION
refers the act of publishing an article
or a substantial part of it more than
once without proper attribution or
justification.

5. This occurs when:
1.Authors present the same findings or data in
multiple publication,either in same or different
language.
2.Submission of the same manuscript to more than
one journal simultaneously.
3.Authors republish their own in a different format or
context without citing the original publication.
EXAMPLES:
DOUBLE PUBLICATION

6. vAcademic Integrity
CONSEQUENCES:
vLoss of Trust
vNegative Public Perception
vLegal Consequences
vReputation damage

7. Importance of
Avoiding Double
Publication
01
Research Integrity
02
Ethical Considerations
03
Time and Resources

8. CONCLUSSIONS:
DOUBLE PUBLICATION
1.Authors must be careful not to attempt duplicate publication.
2.These practices are serious violation of copyright laws and
the integrity of scientific literature.
3.It is also viewed as “violations of authorial integrity”.
4.Following all the research ethics for publication is necessary
for an author.

9. Forum Shopping
- refers to the practice where
researchers submit their papers to
multiple journals simultaneously or
to less rigorous journals to ensure
publication, often bypassing critical
peer review.

10. •Motivations Behind Forum Shopping
- Pressure to Publish
Highlight the "publish or perish" culture in academia,
which can drive researchers to seek quick and easy publication
avenues.
- Desire for Recognition
Some researchers might aim for high visibility, opting for
journals with high acceptance rates even if the quality is
questionable.
-Rejection from High-Impact Journals
After being rejected from high-impact journals,
researchers may turn to lesser-known or less stringent
journals to publish their work.
Understanding Forum Shopping

11. •Methods of Forum Shopping
- Simultaneous Submissions
Submitting the same paper to multiple journals at
once, which is generally against publication ethics.
- Targeting Lower-Tier Journals
Deliberately choosing journals known for their
lenient review processes.
Understanding Forum Shopping

12. Example
of
Forum Shopping

13. Simultaneous Submissions and Low-Quality Journal Targeting
Incident:
The researcher submits
their paper to three journals:
Journal A, Journal B, and
Journal C. Journal A is a
reputable, high-impact journal
known for its rigorous peer
review process. Journals B and
C are less prestigious, with
lower impact factors and more
lenient review processes.
Journal A takes several months to
review the submission, eventually
rejecting the paper due to insufficient
novelty.
Journal B accepts the paper after a brief
review, with minimal revisions required.
The paper is published within a few
months.
Journal C meanwhile, also accepts the
paper, but the researcher does not
withdraw the submission after receiving
the acceptance from Journal B. The paper
is later published in Journal C as well.

14. Simultaneous Submissions and Low-Quality Journal Targeting
Consequences:
•Duplication of Research
The same research paper appears
in two different journals (Journal B
and Journal C), causing confusion in
the academic community and leading
to unnecessary redundancy in the
literature.
•Reputation Damage
When the duplication is
discovered, the researcher's reputation
is severely damaged. Both Journal B
and Journal C retract the paper, and
the researcher is publicly reprimanded.
This action also calls into question the
credibility of the institutions affiliated
with the researcher.
-
Consequences:
•Ethical Violation
The researcher's actions are
deemed an ethical violation. The
academic institution where the
researcher works initiates an
investigation, which could potentially
lead to sanctions, including denial of
tenure or termination of employment.
•Impact on Journals
Journals B and C face criticism for
their lack of thorough peer review
and poor communication channels that
allowed the duplication to occur.

15. Simultaneous Submissions and Low-Quality Journal Targeting
Lessons Learned:
•Importance of Adhering to Submission Policies
Researchers must adhere strictly to journal submission
guidelines to maintain the integrity of the academic publishing
process.
•Role of Journals in Preventing Forum Shopping
Journals need strong systems to detect and prevent
simultaneous submissions, including better coordination and
communication across publishing platforms.
•Consequences for Research Integrity
Forum shopping not only risks the reputation of the individual
researcher but also undermines the trustworthiness of academic
research as a whole.

16. CONSEQUENCES:
•On Academic Integrity
-Dilution of Quality
The publication of unvetted or poorly reviewed research can flood the
academic landscape with low-quality papers.
-Erosion of Trust
This practice can erode trust in academic journals and the peer review
process.
•On Researchers
-Reputation Damage
Researchers found engaging in forum shopping risk damaging their
professional reputations and future opportunities for collaboration or funding.
-Ethical Violations
Forum shopping can lead to accusations of ethical breaches, which may have
serious consequences.

17. CONSEQUENCES:
•On the Academic Community
- Research Duplication
Simultaneous submissions can lead to the duplication of published
research, causing confusion and redundancy.
- Resource Drain
Journals waste resources on reviewing the same paper or dealing with
retractions.

18. Call to Action
Urge stakeholders in the academic community, including
researchers, journals, and institutions, to work together in
combating forum shopping and maintaining the integrity of
academic publishing.
CONCLUSSIONS:
FORUM SHOPPING

19. REFERENCES:
•https://publicationsethics.org/guidance/Case
•https:/www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161475406001825
•https://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk/multiple-duplicate-concurrent-
publication-simultaneoussubmission
•https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines

20. Thank You
for listening.
God bless!