Unethical Dual Submission Raises Concerns in Academic Publishing
In a recent case that has raised eyebrows in the academic community, Journal A encountered a paper that was swiftly rejected due to its poor quality and lack of originality. However, what followed was even more concerning.
A month later, the same paper surfaced at Journal B, coincidentally sharing premises with Journal A. Remarkably, it was a verbatim resubmission, albeit with a slightly altered title. Upon closer inspection, editorial assistants discovered that the content was identical to the rejected submission at Journal A.
Both journals promptly reached out to the authors, requesting confirmation of exclusive submission. Surprisingly, the authors affirmed single submission to each journal but offered a vague explanation, citing the papers were "interlaced." They pleaded for simultaneous review and vowed to tailor the manuscripts to each journal's audience post-review.
Doubts lingered regarding the authors' integrity, with suspicions of multiple submissions elsewhere. Unfortunately, verification proved elusive. Furthermore, the paper's quality raised doubts about its acceptability in any reputable journal.
In light of this incident, COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) advises a thorough examination of how many journals received the paper. It also suggests extending guidance to the authors on proper submission practices, referencing the COPE Guidelines on Good Publication Practice.
This incident serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding ethical standards in academic publishing and the need for vigilance against unethical practices.
