Handling Duplicate Submission and Self-Plagiarism: Responsibility of Authors
In a recent case study, the question of accountability arises concerning a submitted article flagged for potential self-plagiarism. The scenario unfolded when a manuscript underwent scrutiny through anti-plagiarism software, revealing a 17% similarity score, just under the 20% threshold set by Journal A. Despite meeting this criterion, concerns were raised by a peer reviewer who discovered significant overlap with content previously published in conference proceedings, reaching approximately 80%.
Upon investigation, the authors claimed innocence, explaining that they had initially submitted only an abstract to an international conference. However, the conference organizers later stipulated that full articles be submitted for inclusion in the proceedings. Under the assumption that their article wouldn't be published in the proceedings, the authors proceeded with the submission, later discovering its appearance on the conference website.
Efforts to rectify the situation, including requests to retract the article from the conference proceedings, were met with silence from the conference organizers. Despite the authors' plea of ignorance, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) suggests that accountability rests with the authors, regardless of their awareness of the situation.
Considering the potential for salvaging the research, COPE advises the journal to explore options for resubmission. This could involve paraphrasing, adding original content, and obtaining clearance or retaining copyright from the conference organizers. By referencing the initial conference publication, the journal could treat the revised submission as new, potentially allowing for its publication with proper acknowledgment.
Ultimately, while the authors may have unknowingly contributed to the issue, the responsibility for addressing duplicate submissions and self-plagiarism falls squarely on their shoulders.
