EDITORIAL DECISION RAISES CONCERNS OVER AUTHORS' PREPRINT BEHAVIOR
In a recent editorial decision, a scholarly journal faced criticism for allowing authors to link to an objectionable version of their article posted on a preprint server. The authors had agreed to remove derogatory comments about individuals and the journal from their commentary before publication. However, they posted an earlier version containing objectionable material to a preprint site and linked it in the published version, despite assurances that the problematic content would be removed.
The journal's editorial team permitted the link's publication due to the absence of a policy prohibiting such actions and to avoid potential bias, as some derogatory remarks were aimed at the journal itself. While the preprint did not contain confidential or fraudulent information, it did include derogatory comments, violating the scholarly discourse expected in peer-reviewed publications.
COPE advises caution in developing policies based on isolated incidents and suggests that some journals allow preprint posting before journal submission but not afterward. In this case, the authors exploited the lack of a policy to circumvent the editorial process and continue making derogatory remarks. If such comments are egregious, they should be brought to the attention of the preprint server moderators or oversight board.
Ultimately, the responsibility lies with the authors for their actions on the preprint server, while the journal is accountable for publishing a sanitized version of the article. This incident highlights the need for clear policies regarding preprint posting and ethical conduct in scholarly communication.
