Authors Refer Readers to Objectionable Preprint Version Despite Journal's Request
In a concerning turn of events, authors of a scholarly commentary agreed to remove derogatory content at the request of the journal's editor, only to post an earlier, objectionable version to a preprint site. Despite their assurance to remove the contentious material prior to journal publication, the authors linked the preprint version in the final published article.
While the editorial team allowed the link due to the absence of a standing policy, this incident highlights the need for clearer guidelines regarding preprint submissions. Some journals permit content posted to preprint servers before journal submission but prohibit it afterwards, potentially mitigating such occurrences.
However, caution is urged against hastily implementing policies based on isolated incidents. Although the preprint contained no confidential or fraudulent information, the authors' actions violated the scholarly integrity expected in both preprint and journal publication processes. If derogatory comments are deemed sufficiently objectionable, they should be reported to the preprint server moderators for appropriate action.
Ultimately, while the journal has published a sanitized version of the article, it bears no responsibility for the authors' actions on the preprint server. This incident underscores the importance of upholding ethical standards and transparency in scholarly communication.
