Defining Who Is the Plagiarist

Summary: A submitted manuscript is found to duplicate a published article with no overlapping authors. When asked, the submitting author says that the article was published by individuals at the submitting author’s former institution, who had access to his computer files. He states that the research is all his and that others used the data without his permission or informing him and published it. What is the correct approach to determining who is the plagiarist and correcting the scientific record? Most members indicated that the original institution should investigate, while acknowledging that the institution may or may not take action. Another option mentioned is the activist role, in which the editor of the journal to whom the duplicate manuscript was submitted publish the manuscript if he believes the submitting author’s explanation, and write an editorial note explaining what happened.--MW

I am forwarding my correspondence with an author of suspected duplicate submission [edited for confidentiality]; he claims that the first manuscript was published by some one else without his knowledge and was plagiarized. Other authors have not yet responded. What in your opinion should be the next course of action?

Manoj Pandey
Editor-in-Chief, World Journal of Surgical Oncology
Sectional Editor, Indian Journal of Surgery
Editorial Secretary, Indian Association of Surgical Oncology

Dear Prof Pandey

Thanks for the mail.

I apologise for what has happened, which is due to no fault of mine.

I did the study entirely on my own, when I was a student at _________ in 2004. I moved hospitals to [another country] and did not have the opportunity to publish the article before then. Unfortunately I had left behind the data and the manuscript in the computer in my previous institution. Since I left, a couple of my previous colleagues had accessed it without my knowledge and then submitted it to [Journal A] in 2005, passing it off as their own. I did not have any knowledge of this.

In good faith I submitted the manuscript to WJSO in Nov 2006  without any knowledge of any of this. I came to know of this only in late 2007, after the review process of the submitted manuscript was completed.  I have tried to contact the corresponding author of the manuscript which was accepted by [Journal A], but have received no reply. All the other co-authors of the manuscript have unfortunately moved on from _______  to other institutions and have expressed their inability to help. I confirm that all the data  collected  and analysed, and each and every sentence of the manuscript which has been published in [Journal A] has been written by me alone.

I am also deeply affected by this plagiarism and back stabbing.

I have not responded to your replies, as I was trying to sort out the issue myself with the authors of the [Journal A] article. Unfortunately I do not have any proof to counter their claims. I am sorry about all this.

I apologise to the reviewers and editors of WJSO  for the inconvenience caused. I am willing to do anything to recify the mistake.

yours sincerely

Dr [Author]

________________________
How much of the text of the submitted manuscript is similar to the published article (plagiarized)?

F Habibzadeh
________________________
The steps to be taken are clearly defined. Contact the author and editor of the alleged fraudulent publication for clarification. The article will have to be retracted if truly redundant or plagiarized, accompanied by an according public statement. Retraction for fraudulent publication will also be listed in online databases, such as PubMed.

You may find a recent editorial in our journal on the topic of interest:

http://www.pssjournal.com/content/2/1/6 <https://dhmail.dhha.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.pssjournal.com/content/2/1/6>

I hope you find this info helpful.

Philip F. Stahel
Editor-in-Chief, Patient Safety in Surgery
________________________
The current case is rather interesting in that the second published paper may be (and I would not wish to make judgments at this time regarding who are the "genuine" authors at this point) what is being perceived as redundant or plagiarized. It will be interesting to follow up and see how this issue will be resolved and if the "real" authors get the credit they deserve.

Adamson Muula
________________________
There are two courses of action available to the editor, depending on how much he wants to stick his neck out.

1. The prudent course.

In this, he points out to the author that, even if all he says is true, the paper cannot be republished, and the author should take the matter up with the people who got it published first, if necessary by arbitration, or even by recourse to legal machinery.

2. The activist course.

If the editor is convinced the article has been plagiarised by the earlier 'authors', he may publish the proper version with an editorial note stating why, and be ready to stick his neck out, not only for the author concerned, but for the sake of protecting the integrity of the scientific record.

Depending on what are the editor's personal guiding principles, and those of the governing body that sustains it, these are the two valid options available.

Ajai Singh
Editor, Mens Sana Monographs
________________________
It will be difficult for you to decide which group of authors are genuine. Whatever the case is, it would be difficult for you to consider the current manuscript as it is clearly a case of duplicate publication.

Regarding originality of authors and the previous article published in [Journal A], the current group of authors need to sort out the issue with [Journal A]. They might file it as a complaint of fraudulent publication with the journal OR if your gut feeling is that the second group of authors are genuine, you, yourself, as a journal editor can file a complaint with the [Journal A] editor.

Dheeraj Shah
Associate Editor, Indian Pediatrics
________________________
This is a complex case because it is difficult to know who is speaking the truth. If what this author has said is correct, then he was too careless to have left his research work on a public computer. However, it does not give anybody the liberty to copy his work and publish elsewhere. As the editor of another journal, you cannot do anything. If the person who is now claiming ownership of the work is sure of what he is saying he should take it up officially with the institution where the research was conducted with proofs and file a case of fraudulent publication with [Journal A].

James Falaiye
________________________
If it is really a duplicate, I believe you should not work on it, and leave the matter in the authors' hands. I believe you should notify both institutions of the authors (the one that published it before and the one has sent you the manuscript).

S Zahedi Asl
Editor in Chief, International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism
________________________
I fully agree with you that it is impossible to set the record straight. We know that one of the two parties is wrong, but which one is impossible to ascertain. I, too, think that the best way is to let the institute investigate; the only problem is how sincere they are towards scientific misconduct. Awareness is the answer as these cases are on the rise. David from EJSO just mentioned 3 cases recently. Need to have institutions come forward and prescribe punishment. As for my university, plagiarism is considered as major misconduct and one found guilty is liable to lose the job. The license to practice in my country is controlled by medical council, and they have so far not come out on scientific misconduct.

Manoj Pandey
Editor-in-Chief, World Journal of Surgical Oncology
Sectional Editor, Indian Journal of Surgery
Editorial Secretary, Indian Association of Surgical Oncology