Research and Publication Ethics

Module 1: Philosophy and Ethics

Basic details

Module 1 Philosophy and Ethics

Teaching hours 04

Module 1: Overview of
content

Introduction to
Philosophy Ethics
1. Definition of Philosophy 6. Definition of Ethics
2. Nature of Philosophy 7. Moral Philosophy
Nature of Moral judgements and
3. Scope of Philosophy 8. reactions
4. Concept of Philosophy
5. Branches of Philosophy

Introduction to Philosophy

1.1 Definition of Philosophy

The origin of “Philosophy” is from two Greek words – ‘Philos’ meaning love and ‘Sofia’ meaning
knowledge or wisdom. Quite literally, the term "philosophy" means, "love of wisdom." In a broad
sense, philosophy is an activity people undertake when they seek to understand fundamental truths
about themselves, the world in which they live, and their relationships to the world and to each other.
As an academic discipline, philosophy is much the same. Those who study philosophy are perpetually
engaged in asking, answering, and arguing for their answers to life’s most basic questions.
Philosophy is a study that “seeks to uncover the nature, root, and meaning of life, being, reality
(metaphysics), ethics, and knowledge (epistemology).”

● Traditionally, the word “philosophy”, means the description of study like logic, sociology,
psychology, etc
● Surfacely, the word “philosophy” means view, vision and outlook of a particular person on a
particular thing
● Literally, philosophy is “the study of nature and meaning of the universe and of human life”
● In the context of research, philosophy refers to a system of beliefs and assumptions about the
development of knowledge
A definition of philosophy is notoriously difficult. Let's look at some authentic definitions of
philosophy by some distinguished philosophers:
● “Philosophy is the science and criticism of cognition” - (Kant)
● “Philosophy is the science of knowledge” - (Fichte)
● “Philosophy aims at the knowledge of the eternal, of the essential nature of things” - (Plato)
● Philosophy is the science which investigates the nature of being as it is in virtue of its own
nature - (Aristotle)
● “Philosophy is the science of sciences” - (Comte)
● “Philosophy is the sum total of all scientific knowledge” - (Dr. Paulsen)
● Philosophy is a way of thinking about certain subjects such as ethics, thought, existence, time,
meaning and value. That 'way of thinking' involves 4 Rs: responsiveness, reflection, reason and re-
evaluation. The aim is to deepen understanding. The hope is that by doing philosophy we learn to
think better, to act more wisely, and thereby help to improve the quality of all our lives.

Here we see that the first two definitions imply philosophy as the epistemological study or the theory
of knowledge. The next two definitions indicate philosophy as metaphysical study or as the theory of
reality. And the last three show the scientific aspect of philosophy. Hence, it can be concluded that
philosophy is the sum total of all of these ideas.

Philosophy harmonizes the highest conclusions of the different sciences, coordinates them one
another, and gives a rational conception (idea) of the whole world.

Summary:

● Philosophy is an activity people undertake when they seek to understand fundamental truths
about themselves, the world in which they live, and their relationships to the world and to each other
● Involves asking, answering, and arguing
● Philosophy is a study that “seeks to uncover the nature, root, and meaning of life, being,
reality (metaphysics), ethics, and knowledge (epistemology).”
● In the context of research, philosophy refers to a system of beliefs and assumptions about the
development of knowledge
● Philosophy harmonizes the highest conclusions of the different sciences, coordinates them
one another, and gives a rational conception (idea) of the whole world.

1.2 Nature of Philosophy [EPDSLFWEAM] [Hospital:Food:Team]

1. Philosophy literally means ‘love of wisdom’: It is an attempt to arrive at a rational conception

of the reality as a whole. It enquires into the nature of the universe in which we live, its constituents
and their relation to one another. It is the art of thinking all things logically, systematically, and
persistently.
2. Philosophy is a persistent attempt to seek clear notions: Clarification of concepts is the task of
philosophy.
3. Philosophy is the critical analysis of the popular and scientific concepts, and the discovery of
their relations to one another. It is a rational attempt to integrate our knowledge and interpret and
unify our experiences.
4. It systematizes our scientific knowledge, and moral, aesthetic and religious experiences: It
analyses the popular and scientific concepts, examines their validity- in the light of reason, and
interrelates them to one another. Its method is logical and rational. Its chief instrument is logic. Its
method is rational speculation, logical analysis and synthesis.
5. Philosophy analyzes the foundations and presuppositions underlying other disciplines:
Philosophy investigates and studies the underpinnings of science, art, and theology. Philosophers do
not ask "Are Pablo Picasso's paintings 'good' art?" (as art critics do) but "Is aesthetic judgment a
matter of personal taste, or are there objective standards that we can apply to evaluate a work of art?"
Philosophers do not ask "Is the theory of evolution true?" (as biologists and physical anthropologists
do) but "How do we distinguish truth from error?"
6. Philosophy attempts to develop a comprehensive conception or apprehension of the world:
Philosophy seeks to integrate the knowledge of the sciences with that of other fields of study to
achieve some kind of consistent and coherent worldview. Philosophers do not want to confine their
attention to a fragment of human experience or knowledge, but rather, want to reflect upon life as a
totality. In speaking of this particular function, Charlie Dunbar Broad, an English twentieth century
philosopher, says: "The objective is to take over the results of the various sciences, to add to them the
results of the religious and ethical experiences of mankind, and then to reflect upon the whole. The
hope is that, by this means, we may be able to reach some general conclusions as to the nature of the
universe, and as to our position and prospects in it."

7. Philosophy studies and critically evaluates our most deeply held beliefs and attitudes, in
particular, those which are often held uncritically: Philosophers have an attitude of critical and logical
thoughtfulness. They force us to see the significance and consequences of our beliefs, and sometimes
their inconsistencies. They analyze the evidence (or lack of it) for our most treasured beliefs, and seek
to remove from our perspectives every taint and trace of ignorance, prejudice, superstition, blind
acceptance of ideas, and any other form of irrationality. It is a study that asks big questions like what
is knowledge? What can we know for certain? How do we know what we know? How can we acquire
knowledge? What is a justified belief, and what makes it justified? etc.

8. Philosophizing is the activity of analysis: Philosophical attitude is reflective and curious,

guided by experience and reasoning. Philosophical methods include induction, deduction, analysis,
synthesis and dialectical methods. Philosophical activity starts from wonder and curiosity. These
activities may be individual as well as social, alone as well as in a group. The real nature of
philosophy is intellectual and purely logical.

9. Philosophy as we know is the study of wisdom and one who loves this wisdom is called
philosopher: Philosopher knows every problem from its root and interprets it through rational basis.
Philosophy, the mother of all science, is the foundation and the touchstone of every other subject
whether physics, mathematics, technology or like humanities.
Keywords: Enquire, Integrate, Interpret, Unify, Critical Evaluation, Analysis, Investigate evidence,
Worldview, Clarity, Logic, Systematizes, Comprehensive

Summary:
● Rational conception of reality as a whole
● Enquiry: Logical, Systematic and Persistent
● Clarity in concepts
● Critical analysis/ evaluation: Discover, Integrate, Interpret, Unify
● Systematize: Scientific, Moral, Aesthetic, Religious
● Logic
● Investigate underpinnings
● Develop a comprehensive idea
● Worldview
● Analyze evidence: Remove irrationality
● Reflective and curious
● Mother of all Science

1.3 Scope of Philosophy [VAIME]

Scope refers to width and breadth, outlook, comprehensiveness, range of experience, purview, etc.
The scope of philosophy is very vast. Francis Bacan, a great English philosopher regarded philosophy
as ‘the great mother of sciences’. The scope of philosophy can be understood by seeing the branches
of philosophy.

● The scope of philosophy is vast and wide. It is an intellectual exercise to know about the basic
nature of phenomena which we encounter in our day to day life.

● It demands for a method, where we acquire knowledge about subject matter & complete its
purpose as well
● The basic method of philosophy is “Rational Enquiry”, which helps in realization of reality
related to various events & circumstances of our life
● It is concerned with all the ethical, political, psychological, economical, scientific and academic
problems of our life, academic areas & society

Summary:

● Vast and Wide

● Concerned with all
● Demands for a method: Acquire knowledge
● Rational enquiry

1.4 Concept of Philosophy

A research philosophy is a belief about the way in which data about a phenomenon should be
gathered, analyzed and used. The term epistemology (what is known to be true) as opposed to
doxology (what is believed to be true) encompasses the various philosophies of research approach.
The nature of philosophy is totally based on thinking ability and thoughts of the human mind. In the
context of research, philosophy refers to a system of beliefs and assumptions about the development
of knowledge.

Generally, research philosophy has many branches related to a wide range of disciplines.

Within the scope of business studies, these are among main research philosophies:

Pragmatism: Seeking solutions for a problem in the real world through generating useful knowledge.
More interested in practical outcomes than abstract distinctions. Follows reflexive process of inquiry:
Initiated by doubt, and a sense that something is wrong which then re-creates a new belief when
problem is resolved

Positivism: Authentic knowledge is only that which is based on actual sense of experience. Blend of
rationalism and empiricism. Researchers herein are likely to use a highly structured methodology in
order to facilitate replication. Importance is for quantitative research.

Realism: Idea that scientifically based theories provide descriptions of the world that are
approximately true. Belief is very important.
Interpretivism: Necessary to differentiate social sciences from natural sciences. Human beings and
social worlds cannot be studied in the same way as physical phenomena. Qualitative in nature.
“Social Action Theory” is prevalent.

Empiricism: All hypotheses and theories should be tested by a process of observation and
experience; emphasizes on evidence based knowledge. Researchers herein can draw a clear
distinction between facts and propositions that have been verified by experience and experiment.

Post-Positivism: Social research using logical reasoning; characterized by use of new tools;
Qualitative in nature. Inductive and deductive methods of reasoning are used.

Summary:

● A research philosophy is a belief about the way in which data about a phenomenon should be
gathered, analyzed and used
● Pragmatism: Outcome to a solution by generating knowledge
● Positivism: Experience; Structured; Replication; Quantitative
● Realism: Scientific theories provide description of the world
● Interpretivism: Differentiate; Qualitative
● Empiricism: Observation and experiment; Evidence
● Post Positivism: Social research via logical reasoning
1.5 Branches of Philosophy

There are many branches of philosophy. Some of the major ones are as follows:
Epistemology: Epistemology is the science of knowledge. Epistemology is derived from Greek terms
‘Episteme’ and ‘Logy’ which means ‘knowledge’ and ‘science or study’. Philosophy is the search for
knowledge. This search is critical. Hence, the first problem which arises before a philosopher is about
the nature of knowledge and its limitations. Therefore, Epistemology is the most fundamental branch
of philosophy. It philosophically discusses the falsehood, validity of knowledge, limits of knowledge
and nature of knowledge, knower and known. Epistemology or the theory of knowledge is concerned
with how we know what we do, what justifies us in believing what we do, and what standards of
evidence we should use in seeking truths about the world and human experience. The main
epistemologies in western philosophy are: rationalism, empiricism, criticism and intuitionism. It
delves into the definition, scope, and parameters of knowledge and knowledge formation. It seeks to
explain how we acquire knowledge, how knowledge relates to notions like justification, truth, and
belief, and how and where it falls in the spectrum of certainty and error.

Metaphysics: This is the study of Existence, reality, nature of being, the physical world, the universe
or essence. It is an ancient subject but one that continues to raise curiosity. Metaphysics is regarded
as the queen of all sciences. There are two approaches related to metaphysics, one that is spiritual,
mystical or in abstract form, another which designates what lies beyond the physical, or what is
separate from the sensible and the perceptible material world. Metaphysics is the philosophical
branch that studies reality, existence, the nature of being, the physical world, and the universe.

Ethics: Ethics discusses the criteria of right and good. Ethics is derived from the Greek word “Ethos”
which means customs, character, usages or habits. Ethics is also called Moral philosophy derived
from the Latin word “Mores” which means customs, habits or character. Ethics literally means the
science of customs, ways of behavior, character or the science of human behavior. Ethics is the area
of philosophy which investigates the principles governing human actions in terms of their goodness,
badness, rightness, and wrongness, duties and obligations. It is concerned with discovering the
principles that should govern human conduct and with the investigation of normative issues involving
value judgment. Moral theory has the same relation to ethical decision making that the study of
grammar has the ability to study language. A person can speak a language without ever having
studied its grammar, and a person can also make ethical decisions without ever having studied moral
theory. But just as our ability to function in a language is often aided by a study of grammar, so does
an inquiry into theoretical concerns aid us in clarifying our ethical choices. Ethics is concerned with
judgments of value and studies what ought to be. Ethics is the science of highest good. Morality and
ethics are used synonymously although there is little difference between these two while morality is
the right or wrong (or otherwise) of an action, a way of life or a decision and Ethics is the study of
such standards as we use or propose to judge such things. Thus, abortion may be moral or immoral
according to code we employ but ethics tells us why we call it so and how we made up our minds. As
a result, ethics is sometimes called moral philosophy; we use it to criticize, defend, promote, justify
and suggest moral concepts and to answer questions of morality. Ethics is a normative science. The
fact that ethics is concerned with an end or ideal or standard serves at once to distinguish it from most
of the other sciences. It is a science which lays down rules, laws or axioms or more strictly, that seeks
to define a standard or ideal with reference to which rules or laws may be formulated. It is the
business of normative science to define an ideal, not to lay down rules for its attainment. For
example, Aesthetics is a normative science; concerned with the standard of beauty; but it is no part of
its business to inquire how beauty is produced. So, with ethics, it discusses the ideal of goodness or
rightness and is not directly concerned with the means by which this ideal may be realized. Ethics
discusses man’s habits and customs, or in other words, their characters, the principles on which they
habitually act, and considers what constitutes the rightness or wrongness of these principles, the good
or evil of these habits.

Logic: Logic studies truth. Logic is the art of reasoning or art of thinking. All reasoning is thinking,
all thinking is not reasoning. Logic has been called the science of reasoning. This is better, but
reasoning is a kind of thinking in which inference takes place and conclusions are drawn from
premises. This process is extremely complex, characterized by a combination of trial and error,
occasionally illuminated by flashes of insight. Logicians are not concerned with the ways in which
the mind arrives at its conclusions in the process of reasoning; they are concerned only with the
correctness of the completed process. The study of the methods and principles used to distinguish
correct from incorrect reasoning is the central issue with which logic deals. Logic has two types:
deductive and inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning involves examining a general case, deducing
a general set of rules or principles, and then applying these rules to specific cases. Inductive
reasoning involves taking specific examples and considering the general principles, rules, or cases
that caused them.

Axiology: Axiology is the branch of philosophy that considers the study of principles and values.
These values are divided into two main kinds: ethics and aesthetics. Ethics is the questioning of
morals and personal values. Aesthetics is the examination of what is beautiful, enjoyable, or tasteful.
In axiology education is more than just about knowledge but also quality of life.

Political Philosophy: Political Philosophy studies political government, laws, liberty, justice, rights,
authority, political states and systems, ethics, and more. It explores the concepts of why we need
governments, the role played by governments, what are its constituents, amongst others.
Summary:

● Epistemology: Science of Knowledge: Nature, limitations, falsehood, validity; how we

acquire knowledge, how knowledge relates to notions like justification, truth, and belief, and how
and where it falls in the spectrum of certainty and error
● Metaphysics: Study of existence, reality, nature of being, physical world and the universe
● Ethics: Area of philosophy which investigates the principles governing human actions in
terms of their goodness, badness, rightness, and wrongness, duties and obligations. Scene of human
behavior; what ought to be; discovering the principles that should govern human conduct
investigation of value judgment. It is a science which lays down rules, laws or axioms or more
strictly, that seeks to define a standard or ideal with reference to which rules or laws may be
formulated.
● Morality is the right or wrong of an action whereas Ethics is the study of such standards as
we use or propose to judge such things
● Logic: Study of truth; Science of reasoning; correctness is priority; The study of the methods
and principles used to distinguish correct from incorrect reasoning is the central issue with which
logic deals. Logic has two types: deductive and inductive reasoning.
Axiology: Study of principles and values; ethics and aesthetics
● Political Philosophy: Studies political government, laws, liberty, justice, rights, authority,
political states and systems, ethics, and more
1.6 Characteristics of Philosophy (Nature and Scope)

● Knowledge is the most important discussing matter of philosophy. It discusses the ins and outs
of knowledge.
● The prime concern of philosophy is life. Nothing in the universe is beyond life and nothing in
life is beyond philosophy. Moreover, philosophy is the criticism and interpretation of life. It enquires
into the nature, meaning, purpose, origin and destiny of human life.
● The chief instrument of philosophy is logic. Being logical, it does not want to believe anything
without logic. Its method is rational speculation, logical analysis and synthesis.
● Philosophy is methodical, based on science
● Philosophy has a close affinity with psychology
● Philosophy and literature are closely related to each other; philosophy is often revealed through
literary works.
● Philosophy also deals with science. It tries to find out the origin of science, and the possibility
of changing the methods of science.
Summary:
● Characterized by knowledge
● Concerns life
● Chief instrument is logic
● Methodical, based on Science

Ethics

1.7 Definition of Ethics

Ethics are moral principles that govern a person's behavior or conduct of an activity. The word ethics
implies a system of accepted beliefs that control our behavior, especially when a decision is based on
morals.

The word, Morality on the other hand implies a set of personal or social standards for good or bad
behavior. Morality is based on an individual’s mindset and basic human instinct.

1.8 Moral Philosophy

The field of ethics, or moral philosophy, investigates theories that can systematically describe what
makes acts right or wrong. Moral Philosophy is the rational study of the meaning and justification of
moral claims. A moral claim evaluates the rightness or wrongness of an action or a person’s
character. Moral philosophy is usually divided into three distinct subject areas: metaethics, normative
ethics, and applied ethics. Moral philosophy is usually divided into three categories:

● Metaethics: Investigates where our moral values, language, and principles come from and
what they mean; it is concerned with “what is morality?” rather than “what is moral?”

● Applied ethics: Seeks to apply philosophical tools to examine specific controversial issues and
provide practical solutions to moral problems
● Normative ethics: Normative ethics investigates the moral standards that regulate right and
wrong conduct. Theories within normative ethics include utilitarianism, consequentialism,
contractualism, virtue ethics, and more.

Value theory is concerned with theoretical questions about value and goodness of all varieties,
questions that often cross the boundaries between normative ethics and the metaethical. It asks how
and why people value something, be it a person, idea, or object; thus both moral and natural goods
are equally relevant to value theory.

Summary:

● Ethics are moral principles that govern a person's behavior or conduct of an activity.
● Moral philosophy investigates theories that can systematically describe what makes acts right
or wrong. Moral Philosophy is the rational study of the meaning and justification of moral claims.
● Metaethics: Investigates where our moral values, language, and principles come from and
what they mean
● Applied ethics: Seeks to apply philosophical tools to examine specific controversial issues
and provide practical solutions to moral problems
● Normative ethics: Normative ethics investigates the moral standards that regulate right and
wrong conduct
● Value theory is concerned with theoretical questions about value and goodness of all
varieties

1.9 Nature of Moral judgements and reactions

Ethics is a science of morality and it discusses the contents of moral consciousness and the various
problems of moral consciousness. Moral consciousness is the consciousness of right and wrong. It
involves three factors:

● Cognitive or intellectual: Moral Judgment

● Affective or emotional: Moral sentiment
● Conative or volitional: Moral obligation

Moral judgment is the main cognitive factor in moral consciousness. It involves intuition of moral
standard by reason and comparison of a voluntary action with it. It also involves evaluation of
voluntary action as right and wrong. The emotional factors include the moral sentiments; moral
judgements are followed by moral sentiments and not vice versa. Moral obligation is the main
conative factor of moral consciousness. It involves the moral impulse to do the right action. We feel
we are under moral obligations to do what is right and avoid what is wrong.

Meaning of moral judgment: Moral judgment is the judgment which deals with the moral value or
quality of an action. It is a judgment of value and it evaluates the rightness or wrongness of our
actions. When we analyze a moral judgment then we find that it contains:
● A subject which will be judged
● An object whose action will be judged
● A standard in conformity to which the action of the subject will be judged
● A power of judging the action as required

Moral judgment is the judgment of the moral quality of voluntary habitual actions. Generally, a moral
judgment is given on the voluntary and habitual actions of a rational being. The voluntary actions of a
rational person which involve deliberation, choice, and resolution, have the moral quality of rightness
and wrongness. They are considered to be right or wrong with the reference to the moral standard. On
the basis of this standard, moral judgment is given. If the voluntary actions conform with the standard
or the ideal, then the moral judgment will express it as the right action. If the action has conflict with
the standard or norms, then the moral judgment will express it as wrong. So, moral judgment involves
comparison of voluntary acts with the moral standard.

Moral judgment is active in nature as it is given upon voluntary and habitual acts of persons and not
upon their passive experiences. Moral judgment is social in character as voluntary acts of a person
being right or wrong more or less affects the interest of others. Man is a social being. His rights and
duties of actions rise out of his relation to other persons in society. So, moral judgment, apart from
society, is inconceivable. Moral judgment can be said to be obligatory in character as a judgment can
be given as right, while we feel the moral obligation to do it. Similarly, moral judgment is given on
an act as wrong, when we feel the moral obligation to refrain from it. Thus, moral judgment is always
accompanied by the sense of duty or moral obligation. And this moral obligation is essentially self-
imposed.

Nature of moral judgment: Moral judgment is a judgment of values. It is distinct from the judgment
of facts. A Judgment of value is a judgment of “what ought to be”.

But a judgment of fact is a judgment of “what is”. Judgment of fact is a descriptive judgment, while
moral judgment is an appreciative or critical judgment. So, moral judgment is a mental act of
pronouncing a particular action to be right or wrong. According to Mackenzie, moral judgment is not
merely to state the nature of some object, but to compare it with a standard and to pronounce it to be
good or evil, right or wrong. So, it is normative.

Moral judgment is inferential in nature, involving the application of a standard to a particular action.
But in the language of Bradley, ordinarily moral judgment is intuitive and immediate as we
intuitively bring an action under a moral rule recognized by the community and judge it to be right or
wrong. It is only in difficult or doubtful cases that we consciously compare an action with the moral
ideal and judge it as right or wrong. Hence, we can find out that a moral judgment presupposes a
subject, who judges an object that is judged, a standard according to which an action is judged.

It is important to observe that moral judgment is distinguished from logical and aesthetical judgment.
As we know Ethics, Logic and Aesthetics are normative science, and accordingly they have three
supreme norms and ideals of life. Ethics is concerned with the ideals of Highest Good, logic is
concerned with the ideal of Truth and aesthetics is concerned with the ideal of Beauty. It is true that
all of them are appreciative or critical of judgment. But moral judgments are always accompanied by
moral obligation and moral sentiments, which are not accompanied by logical and aesthetic
judgments. When we judge an action to be right, we feel a moral obligation to perform it and have a
feeling of approval. If we judge an action to be wrong, we feel that under moral obligation we are not
to perform it and therefore, we have a feeling of disapproval. Feeling of approval, disapproval,
rightness, wrongness etc. are called moral sentiments. Thus, moral judgments are obligatory in
character and are accompanied by moral sentiments. So, they differ from logical and aesthetic
judgments which are not accompanied by moral obligation and moral sentiments. Moral judgements,
whether something is good or bad in its own right are contained wholly in the field of ethics. In the
process of reasoning we find different classes of judgements and they are usually judgments of facts.
But moral judgment as a judgment of value is concerned with what ought to be. It judges our actions
ought to be. It has distinctive features. It is critical and appreciative. It is the mental act of discerning
and pronouncing a particular action to be right or wrong. After evaluation and deliberation actions are
to be judged in conformity with a standard. ‘To speak the truth is always right’ is a moral judgment.
Moral judgment differs from judgment of fact which is descriptive judgment and it describes what is.
Judgements of facts are more objective because they depend on the real nature of the world. For
example ‘Water is composed of oxygen and hydrogen’. Moral judgment is inferential in character
though the element of inference generally remains implicit. It involves the application of a standard to
a particular action. When we perceive a voluntary action, we compare it with the moral standard and
we judge whether the action is in conformity with it or not. Ordinarily moral judgements are intuitive
and immediate. F.H. Bradley says that they are intuitive subsumptions. But in complex and doubtful
cases the whole process becomes explicit and reflective. In complicated circumstances the moral
standard is explicitly held before the mind and applied to the cases under consideration.

Elements of Moral Judgment:

● Moral Imagination: Ability to see that business and moral relationships are intertwined;
Recognizing that moral issues exist in day to day life
● Moral identification and ordering: Identify and prioritize issues; Distinguish valid from
rhetorical
● Moral evaluation: Arriving at practical decisions based on reasoning; Consistency and
coherence is key
● Tolerance of Moral ambiguity: Even though if others disagree or in case not having clear
answers, one has to be ethical
● Integration of Managerial and Moral competence: Most ethical standards are based on
economic decisions. Moral competence should be an integral part of Managerial and leadership
competence

● Moral obligation: Foundation to all other elements; Person with moral obligation will feel
necessity and / or urgency to act rightfully in fairness to all with utmost concern for justice;
Motivating and the driving force behind making moral judgments and implementing ethical decisions

Object and Subject of Moral Judgment:

● Object: Voluntary actions (Freedom of will); Internal factors of voluntary actions:

○ Mental stage (motive, intention, desire, deliberation, choice, resolution)
○ Organic stage (bodily action)
○ External stage (consequence)
○ Do we judge an act by its motive, intent or by its consequence?
○ Whether the object is Motive or consequence?

● Subject: Rational self or ideal self

● Morality vs law: Eg: Abortion

Summary:

● Moral consciousness is the consciousness of right and wrong. It involves three factors:

○ Cognitive: Moral Judgment

○ Affective: Moral sentiment
○ Conative: Moral obligation

● Moral judgment is the main cognitive factor in moral consciousness. Moral judgment is the
judgment which deals with the moral value or quality of an action. It involves: Subject, Object,
Standard, Power

● Moral judgment is the judgment of the moral quality of voluntary habitual actions; If the
voluntary actions conform with the standard or the ideal, then the moral judgment will express it as
the right action. If the action has conflict with the standard or norms, then the moral judgment will
express it as wrong.
● Moral judgments are passed on voluntary and habitual actions; Non voluntary actions are
outside the scope of moral judgment
● Active in nature
● Social in character
● Obligatory in character; Sense of duty
● Accompanied by Moral sentiments
● Self Imposed
● Judgment of values vs. Judgment of facts
● Inferential
● Intuitive
● Immediate
● Critical and appreciative
● Objective validity: An action is right from the standpoint of the universe
● Not determined by subjective inclination and prejudices one may have
● Elements of Moral judgment: Imagination, Ordering, Evaluation, Tolerance, Integration,
Moral obligation
● Subject and Object of Moral Judgment
● Moral judgments (Highest good/ ethics) vs logical judgments (truth) vs Aesthetics
judgements (beauty) vs factual judgments

Module 2: Scientific Conduct

● Ethics with respect to Science and Research
● Intellectual honesty and Research integrity
● Scientific misconducts: Falsification, Fabrication and Plagiarism (FFP)
● Redundant publications: Duplicate and overlapping publications, Salami slicing
● Selective reporting and Misrepresentation of data

2.1 Ethics with respect to Science and Research

The most common way of defining ethics is norms for conduct that distinguish between acceptable
and unacceptable behavior. The term “Research Ethics” refers to a wide variety of values, norms, and
institutional arrangements that help constitute and regulate scientific activities. Research ethics is a
codification of scientific morality in practice. In other words, research ethics may be referred to as doing
what is morally and legally right in research. Broadly, there are 3 different perspectives on ethics:

● Ethics as a disposition: Moral virtues are inherently present, just have to dispose
● Ethics as duty: It is one’s duty to act in a way that upholds values
● Ethics as utilitarian: Relates to principles of ethical conduct that benefits majority of stakeholders at
large

Objectives of Research ethics: [PSE] [Clue: PSG not having ethics]

● Protect human participants

● Ensure research is conducted in such a way that it serves interests of all stakeholders, society at large
● Examine research activities for ethical soundness

It is important to adhere to ethical norms in research: [PPCAM] [PPHegde Camera]

● Promotes the aim of research, such as knowledge, truth, and avoidance of error. For example,
prohibitions against fabricating, falsifying, or misrepresenting research data promotes truth and
minimizes error.

● Since research often involves a great deal of cooperation and coordination among many different
people in different disciplines and institutions, ethical standards should promote values that are
essential to collaborative work, such as trust, accountability, mutual respect, and fairness.

● Ethical norms must help to ensure that researchers are held accountable to the public
7. Ethical norms in research should also help to build public support for research. People are more
likely to fund a research project if they can trust the quality and integrity of research.
8. Promote a variety of other important moral and social values, such as social responsibility, human
rights, animal welfare, compliance with the law, and public health and safety.

2.1.1 Ethical Principles [HOICOTLAICRRR] [Head of the institute should participate in

CO setting and TLA process in Intelligent college thus becoming hit like RRR movie]

Honesty: Strive for honesty in all scientific communications. Honestly report data, results, methods
and procedures, and publication status. Do not fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent data. Do not deceive
colleagues, research sponsors, or the public.

Objectivity: Strive to avoid bias in experimental design, data analysis, data interpretation, peer review,
personnel decisions, grant writing, expert testimony, and other aspects of research where objectivity is
expected or required. Avoid or minimize bias or self-deception. Disclose personal or financial interests
that may affect research.

Integrity: Keep your promises and agreements; act with sincerity; strive for consistency of thought and
action.

Carefulness: Avoid careless errors and negligence; carefully and critically examine your own work and
the work of your peers. Keep good records of research activities, such as data collection, research design,
and correspondence with agencies or journals.

Openness: Share data, results, ideas, tools, resources. Be open to criticism and new ideas.

Transparency: Disclose methods, materials, assumptions, analyses, and other information needed to
evaluate your research.

Accountability: Take responsibility for your part in research and be prepared to give an account (i.e.
an explanation or justification) of what you did on a research project and why.
Intellectual Property: Honor patents, copyrights, and other forms of intellectual property. Do not use
unpublished data, methods, or results without permission. Give proper acknowledgement or credit for
all contributions to research. Never plagiarize.

Confidentiality: Protect confidential communications, such as papers or grants submitted for

publication, personnel records, trade or military secrets, and patient records.

Responsible Publication: Publish in order to advance research and scholarship, not to advance just
your own career. Avoid wasteful and duplicative publication.
Responsible Mentoring: Help to educate, mentor, and advise students. Promote their welfare and
allow them to make their own decisions.

Respect for Colleagues: Respect your colleagues and treat them fairly

Social Responsibility: Strive to promote social good and prevent or mitigate social harms through
research, public education, and advocacy.

Non-Discrimination: Avoid discrimination against colleagues or students on the basis of sex, race,
ethnicity, or other factors not related to scientific competence and integrity.

Competence: Maintain and improve your own professional competence and expertise through lifelong
education and learning; take steps to promote competence in science as a whole.

Legality: Know and obey relevant laws and institutional and governmental policies.

Animal Care: Show proper respect and care for animals when using them in research.
Do not conduct unnecessary or poorly designed animal experiments.
Human Subjects protection: When conducting research on human subjects, minimize harms and
risks and maximize benefits; respect human dignity, privacy, and autonomy; take special precautions
with vulnerable populations; and strive to distribute the benefits and burdens of research fairly.
Summary:
10. Ethics: Moral code to distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable behavior; States what is
legally and morally right; concerned with values that constitute and regulate scientific activities;
Scientific morality
11. Ethics as disposition (inherent), duty (uphold values) and utilitarian (stakeholders)
12. Objectives: Protect participants, Ensure societal benefit, Examine for Ethical soundness
13. Ethical norms should: Promote aim of research, Encourage collaboration, Accountability, Gain
public support, Promote social and ethical values
14.Ethical principles: Honesty, Competence, Relevance, Transparency, Respect, Impartiality,
Accountability, Responsible publication and so on
2.2 Intellectual honesty and Research integrity

Intellectual Honesty: Researchers have a moral duty to be honest. This duty is especially important
when we share ideas that can inform or persuade others. Intellectual honesty is honesty in the
acquisition, analysis, and transmission of ideas. A person is being intellectually honest when he or she,
knowing the truth, states that truth.
Intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving, characterized by an unbiased, honest
attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways including: [IOUP] [Soup with I]

● Ensuring support for chosen ideologies does not interfere with the pursuit of truth
● Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when such things may contradict
one's hypothesis
● Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to
support one view over another
● References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided

Intellectual Honesty (Individual level) [APAPCCDOOHICA] [Opening Cafe coffee day in

Andhra pradesh with High command’s acknowledgement]

● Research should be based on originality and innovation

● Accuracy in representing contributions

● Protect identity of respondent

● Due acknowledgement of web based resources

● No to Plagiarism

● Citing all related papers including those submitted, but not accepted

● Revealing conflict of interest or potential ones

● Avoid duplicate publication

● Avoid Guest, Ghost and Gift authorship

● Adopt best practices recommended by COPE (Submit, encourage and behavior)

● Respect Intellectual property

● Be honest and objective while submission

● All communication between author and journal should be treated as confidential

Intellectual Honesty (Publisher level) [ACCCBV] [In constructing CCD, use ACC cement
because it will ensure victory]
● Adherence to ethical practices (COPE or WAME)

● Reveal conflict of interest

● Treat all information in the article as confidential

● Be vigilant in spotting ethical misconduct

● Motive is building better society, not commercial purpose

● Avoid predatory or bogus journals

Research integrity: Research integrity may be defined as active adherence to the ethical principles
and professional standards essential for the responsible practice of research:

● By active adherence we mean adoption of the principles and practices as a personal credo, not simply
accepting them as impositions by rule makers

● By ethical principles we mean honesty, trustworthiness, and high regard for the scientific record

The integrity of research depends on honesty and trust. Research integrity includes:

● Use of honest and verifiable methods in proposing, performing and evaluating research
● Reporting research results with particular attention to rules, regulations and guidelines
● Following commonly accepted professional codes or norms

Research integrity means conducting research according to the highest professional and ethical
standards, so that the results are trustworthy. It concerns the behavior of researchers at all stages of the
research life-cycle, including:

● Declaring competing interests

● Data collection and data management
● Using appropriate methodology
● Drawing conclusions from results
● Writing up research findings

Research integrity can be confused with research ethics and publishing ethics. Although these terms are
connected, there are differences. Research ethics is specifically concerned with the ethical issues which
may arise when conducting research involving animals or human subjects.
“For individuals, research integrity is an aspect of moral character and experience. It involves above all a
commitment to intellectual honesty and personal responsibility for one's actions and to a range of
practices that characterize responsible research conduct”. These practices include:

Integrity at individual level:

● Honesty and fairness in proposing, performing, and reporting research

● Accuracy and fairness in representing contributions to research proposals and reports

● Proficiency and fairness in peer review

● Collegiality in scientific interactions, communications and sharing of resources

● Disclosure of conflicts of interest

● Protection of human subjects in the conduct of research

● Humane care of animals in the conduct of research

● Adherence to the mutual responsibilities of mentors and trainees

While science encourages vigorous defense of one's ideas and work, ultimately research integrity means
examining the data with objectivity and being guided by the results rather than by preconceived notions.
Integrity at institutional level:

● Provide leadership

● Encourage respect for everyone

● Promote productive interactions

● Adherence to rules

● Anticipate, reveal and manage individual and institutional conflict of interest

● Adherence to rule based mechanism

● Timely and thorough investigations and appropriate administrative actions in relation to

scientific misconduct

● Offer educational opportunities in promoting integrity

 ● Monitor and evaluate the ecosystem for continuous quality improvement

Publishing ethics is related to the integrity of the publication process, rather than the conduct of the
research itself. Publishing ethics cover a range of issues, such as:

● Dual submission

● Authorship disputes

● Bias in peer review

● Breaches of confidentiality in peer review

Summary:
● Intellectual honesty is honesty in the acquisition, analysis, and transmission of ideas. A person is
being intellectually honest when he or she, knowing the truth, states that truth.

● Intellectual honesty can be demonstrated by creating an ecosystem which

promotes pursuit of truth, discourages plagiarism, ensures unbiased presentation of facts and so on

● Intellectual honesty is to be promoted at both individual and publisher level

● Research integrity may be defined as active adherence to the ethical principles and professional
standards essential for the responsible practice of research

● Adopting, not just acceptance; Following professional codes, imbibing ethical values, attention to
rules, honest and verifiable methods

● Research integrity is to be promoted at both individual and institutional level

2.3 Scientific misconducts: Falsification, Fabrication and Plagiarism (FFP)

Scientific misconduct is the violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behavior in
the publication of professional scientific research. Research related misconduct can occur at any stage of
the research cycle. Research is the driving force for innovations and technical advancement in the world.
Research misconduct is defined as “fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing or
reviewing research, or in reporting of research results”. It is on the rise because:
● Increasing emphasis on research by academic institutions
● Difficulty in publishing in standard journals
● Constant pressure in the academic ecosystem
● Lack of systematic reporting standards

Some common examples are: Misappropriation of Ideas, Plagiarism, Self-plagiarism, Falsification of

Data, Failure to Support Validation of Your Research and so on
● Falsification: Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or
changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research
record.
● Fabrication: Fabrication is the construction and/or addition of data, observations, or
characterizations that never occurred in the gathering of data or running of experiments. Claims about
results need to be made on complete data sets (as is normally assumed), where claims made based on
incomplete or assumed results is a form of fabrication. The validity of knowledge created by science and
the credibility of science, truth and trust, are undermined by fabrication. When detected, the sanctions
for perpetrators can be severe and articles will be retracted. Not only does fabrication affect scientific
careers, but when fabricated data is presented to be real and is consequently used in real-life practice it
can have life-threatening consequences. One case of research misconduct estimates that up to 800,000
lives were lost due to fabrication of data of a single perpetrator.
● Plagiarism: Plagiarism is presenting someone else's work or ideas as your own, with or without
their consent, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and
unpublished material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this
definition. It paints a misleading picture of a researcher's own contribution.
Plagiarism can involve copying words or images directly, paraphrasing sentences or passages, or co-

opting someone else’s ideas without citing the original work. In academic writing, these are various

types of plagiarism you might encounter:

○ Global plagiarism means plagiarizing an entire text. This includes purchasing an essay or turning

in an assignment completed by someone else.

○ Patchwork or mosaic plagiarism means copying phrases, passages, and ideas from different

sources and compiling them into a new text.

○ Incremental plagiarism means inserting a small amount of plagiarized content in a mostly

original text.
○ Self-plagiarism means recycling your own previous work that you’ve already submitted or

published.

● Plagiarism can be avoided by adopting following tips: Don’t just copy, Use a range of sources,

Develop your own style, Use quotation marks, Keep good quality notes.

Summary:
● Scientific misconduct is the violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical
behavior in the publication of professional scientific research
● Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing
or reviewing research, or in reporting of research results
● Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting
data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
● Fabrication is the construction and/or addition of data, observations, or characterizations that
never occurred in the gathering of data or running of experiments
● Plagiarism is presenting someone else's work or ideas as your own
● Types of Plagiarism: Global: Entire text, Patchwork: From different sources,
Incremental: Small part in a largely original text, Self: Recycling one’s previous work
2.4 Redundant publications: Duplicate and overlapping publications, Salami slicing

Redundant publications: Duplicate and overlapping publications

● Redundant publication (salami publishing) is publication of a paper that overlaps substantially

with one already published in print or electronic form
● It occurs when 2 or more papers without appropriate full cross reference, share the same hypothesis,
data, sample size, methodology or similar results and conclusions
● One study is split into several parts and submitted to two or more journals, Or the findings have
previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification.
● Factors leading to redundant publication:
○ Publishing papers from one’s own dissertation
○ Reporting on a longitudinal program of study
○ Writing same content in various languages
○ Writing same content for different audiences
● Following problem are created because of redundant publications:
○ Precious time being wasted of peer-reviewers and editors
○ Leads to flawed meta-analysis
○ Distort academic reward systems
○ Infringement of copyright
○ Inflates scientific literature for no benefits other than the author

Duplicate and Overlapping publications:

● Duplicate (form of redundant) publication occurs when an author reuses substantial parts of their
own published work without providing the appropriate references. This can range from publishing an
identical paper in multiple journals, to only adding a small amount of new data to a previously published
paper.
● Secondary publication is an acceptable type of publication – the publication of the same article
for different audiences – for example, in a different journal or in a different language
● Secondary publication is acceptable if: Approval from both editors, Different audience, Faithful
reflection of data, Primary reference is stated in footnote of title page
● How to identify duplicate publications?
○ Reproduction of an article already published using identical sample and outcomes
○ Assembly of 2 or more articles to produce new one
○ Reporting different outcomes from same study sample
○ New data is added to a preliminary article
○ Reporting part of a large trial and reporting identical outcomes
● Problems caused by duplicate publication:
○ They waste finite resources. Journals have a limited number of pages available and duplicate
submissions will be reviewed twice, indexed twice, copyedited twice, distributed twice and so on.
○ They overload available information. It simply takes longer to find what you need.
○ They overemphasize the findings
○ Duplicate publications contravene copyright law, if you have signed your copyright across to another
journal. This is less of a problem these days with Open Access, where the requirement for an author to
hand over copyright is becoming rare
● How to avoid duplicate publications?
○ No need to repeat unless further confirmation
○ Cite all related papers, including those submitted, but not yet accepted
○ Full disclosure about previous publications
○ Being clear about new information
○ Disclose full details of related papers
○ Emphasis on quality over quantity
○ Awareness programs
○ Strict rules and penalties
● Overlapping publication: For research reports: when two (or more) articles report the same
analysis of the same data set, or contain relatively small amounts of new data or alternative analyses
compared with the original publication, particularly when this is done in such a way that
reviewers/readers are unlikely to realize that some of the findings have been published before
● For reviews and editorials: when two (or more) review articles or editorials include material that has
been published elsewhere by the author(s)
Salami Slicing
● Publication of two or more articles derived from a single study
● Articles of such type report on data collected from a single study split into several segments just large
enough to gain reasonable results and conclusions, also known as “minimal publishable unit”
● The problematic act of dividing a research report in small units for the sake of multiple publications
● Splitting of data derived from a single research idea into multiple smaller “publishable” units or
“slices
● Involves breaking up or segmenting a large study in to two or more publications
● Why is it bad?
○ Distortion of the literature by leading unsuspecting readers to believe that data presented in each
salami slice (i.e., journal article) is derived from a different subject sample
○ Skews the scientific database
○ Creates repetition that wastes readers’ time as well as the time of editors and reviewers, who must
handle each paper separately
○ Inflates the author’s citation record
● When is it justified?
○ If a major research project is so extensive that it involves several research groups across disciplines,
then it is justified that there are multiple publications to convey the overall impact of the research

Summary:
● Redundant publication (salami publishing) is publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with
one already published in print or electronic form
● Duplicate (form of redundant) publication occurs when an author reuses substantial parts of their
own published work without providing the appropriate references
● Factors: Own dissertation, Different audiences, Different languages

● Problems caused: Waste resources, Overload inf, Overemphasize findings, Contravene copyright
laws, Distort academic reward systems
● How to avoid: Cite, Disclosure, Being clear, Awareness, Strict rules and penalties
● Secondary publication is an acceptable type of publication – the publication of the same article for
different audiences
● Overlapping publication is when two (or more) articles report the same analysis of the same data set
● Salami Slicing: Publication of two or more articles derived from a single study
● Why bad?: Repetition, Inflates academic record, skews database, Distortion of literature

2.5 Selective reporting and misrepresentation of data

● Selective reporting bias is when results from scientific research are deliberately not fully or
accurately reported, in order to suppress negative or undesirable findings
● Selective reporting bias can incorporate a number of other types of bias, such as:
○ Publication bias: Results of negative clinical trials are not published or under-published
○ Outcome reporting bias: Results of negative clinical trials are cherry-picked or distorted to
improve the overall findings
○ Spin: Communicating results in a way which amplifies positive findings or tones down negative
findings
○ Citation bias: Positive studies are more likely to be cited than negative studies
○ Design bias: Research team creates the process in which the experiment will be performed. If there
isn’t a wide enough selection of demographics and a large enough population in the data pool, design
bias could exist. This is where selective reporting also sneaks in. If a population of people

are omitted that could be affected by the study, the final outcome could be invalid.
○ Procedural bias: Procedural bias can occur when a researcher decides that the next step in an
experiment should go a predetermined way, whether the results of the previous step demonstrate that
direction or not. This frequently happens when the researcher is rushed, a time limit is in place,
resources and funds have to be considered, or faulty equipment is used.
○ Personal biases: The most difficult types of biases to avoid are personal biases because they are
part of the researcher’s character the scholar may not even realize they exist. Personal bias influences
data collection when the interviewer is unconsciously or purposely using body language to get the
respondent to answer a question in a certain way, or they can occur when the researcher is determining
the importance of qualitative data and chooses to omit data because of a stereotype or belief they have
that a certain demographic is not as important as another.
● Factors leading to Selective reporting:
○ Omitting outcomes from the final publication of a study because of a selective decision that those
findings were not significant enough to warrant being included in the article
○ Choosing data based on personal choices rather than including all collected data for a clear picture
○ Only reporting subsets of the data collected instead of using all the data to demonstrate a full
understanding of a subject
○ Choosing to under-report data because of a decision that the changes in the collected information
were not deemed to be significant by the researcher

Misrepresentation of data:

● Misrepresenting data include drawing unwarranted inference from data, creating deceptive graphs of
figures, and using suggestive language for rhetorical effect;
Interpretation of the results that is not consistent with the actual results of the study. This type of spin
will alter the readers' critical appraisal of the study and could impact the interpretation of evidence
synthesis.
● There are three types of misrepresentations:
○ Innocent misrepresentation: False claim regarding a study when knows it isn't true
○ Negligent misrepresentation
○ Fraudulent misrepresentation
● Misrepresentation of data is ‘communicating honestly reported data in a deceptive manner.’ But
what is deceptive communication? The use of statistics presents researchers with numerous
opportunities to misrepresent data. For example, one might use a statistical technique, such as multiple
regression or the analysis of variance, to make one's results appear more significant or convincing than
they really are. Or one might eliminate (or trim) outliers when ‘cleaning up’ raw data. Other ways of
misrepresenting data include drawing unwarranted inference from data, creating deceptive graphs of
figures, and using suggestive language for rhetorical effect.
● Manipulation of images:
○ Image tampering
○ Usage of filters to manipulate images
○ Resizing of image
○ Using same image to represent different results
○ Distorting visual representation such as increasing brightness
● Guidelines to prevent manipulation of images:
○ Authors must provide original unprocessed images
○ Journal guidelines deal with the subject
○ Adjustments are only acceptable if they apple equally across the entire image
○ Checking correctness of images
● How to avoid data misrepresentation?
○ Analyze complete data
○ Use appropriate tools depending on type of data
○ Put data in context
○ Avoid patterns of association between only 2 points
○ Data should be presented such that it is easily understandable
○ All data fields be appropriately labeled
○ Any special message if associated with data, should be clearly specified
● Data access and retention
○ Purpose: Further use
○ All data in relation to a research paper should be retained for a reasonable time after publication

Summary:
● Selective reporting bias is when results from scientific research are deliberately not fully or
accurately reported in order to suppress negative or undesirable findings
● Types: Publication, Outcome reporting, Spin, Citation, Design, Procedural, Personal
● Factors: Under-reporting, Selective reporting, Selective choice making in use of data, Selective
decision making in publishing findings
● Misrepresenting data include drawing unwarranted inference from data, creating deceptive graphs,
using suggestive language and so on
● Why not? - Alter Critical appraisal, Impact Evidence synthesis
● Types: Innocent, Negligent, Fraudulent
● How? - Use of statistics, Trimming, Manipulating images, and so on
● Manipulation of images: Image tampering, Resizing, Use of filter, Distorting image properties,
Duplication
● How to prevent it (Publisher)? - Strict journal guidelines, Control mechanism, Awareness,
Collecting original images, Changes to be made across the whole image
How to avoid it (Author)? - Appropriate tools, Contextual data, Easy representation
● Data access and retention: Future use

Research and Publication Ethics

Module 3: Publication Ethics
Basic details

Module 3 Publication Ethics

Teaching hours 07

Module 3: Overview of content

Scientific Conduct
● Publication ethics: Definition, Introduction and Importance
● Best practices/ standards setting initiatives and guidelines: COPE, WAME etc
● Conflict of Interest
● Publication Misconduct: Definition, concept, problems that lead to unethical behavior and vice versa,
types
● Violation of publication ethics, authorship and contributorship
● Identification of publication misconduct, complaints and appeals
● Predatory publishers and journals

1 Publication ethics: Definition, Introduction and importance

Definition and Introduction:

● Ethical code of conduct that binds researcher at every stage

● Publication ethics are rules of conduct generally agreed upon when publishing results of
scientific research or other scholarly work.
● Generally it is a standard that protects intellectual property and forbids the re-publication of
another's work without proper credit. It also forbids the use of plagiarism of another's efforts.
● The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is an international forum for editors and
publishers of peer-reviewed journals that provide the “code of conduct” and “best practice
guidelines” that define publication ethics and advises editors on how to handle cases of
research and publication misconduct
● In India, UGC published Good Academic Research Practices (GARP) which provides
framework for enhancing research integrity by focusing on potential threats and good
practices at each and every stage
● Publication ethics should promote Research Integrity, which can be done by promoting values
in the conduct and management of research, such as Openness, Honesty, Accountability,
Transparency, Impartiality, Integrity, Carefulness, Independence, Rigour and so on
● Publication misconduct includes Research fraud, Redundant publication, Simultaneous
publication, Authorship abuse, Self citation, Plagiarism and so on
● The Ethics committee plays an important role in formulating, implementing and regulating
Publication ethics. UGC has drafted a common policy as follows:
All Universities in India must be equipped with Research ethics committee at
departmental level
UGC recommends DAIP and IAIP panels should be present (Departmental and
Institutional Academic Integrity Panel)
Research protocols may be submitted to such committees for consideration, guidance,
improvement and approval before commencement of the study
● Research ethics committee shall
Promote awareness programs regarding do’s and don'ts of the research
Act as mediators or advisors in disputed cases through DAIP and
IAIP
Encourage organizational research culture based upon defensible standards of
research practices
Show commitment to high quality, transparent and accountable research ethics
throughout India
Monitor progress of ongoing studies
Organize seminar/ awareness programs on Research and Publication ethics for
all
● Researcher responsibilities:
Update committee regarding events, issues and status of research
Send a copy of thesis
 Send details of all publications

Importance of Publication ethics:

● Norms promote the aims of research, such as knowledge, truth, and avoidance of error
● Prohibitions against fabricating, falsifying, or misrepresenting research data promote the
truth and minimize error
● Promotes values that are essential to collaborative work, such as trust, accountability, mutual
respect, and fairness
● Helps to ensure that researchers can be held accountable to the public
● Helps to build public support for research
● Promotes a variety of other important moral and social values, such as social responsibility,
human rights, animal welfare, compliance with the law, and public health and safety.
3.2 Best practices/ standards setting initiatives and guidelines: COPE, WAME

9. COPE: Committee on Publication ethics was founded in 1997 to address breaches in research
and publication ethics
10. Supports and encourages editors to report, catalog and instigate investigations in relation to
research misconduct
11. COPE has published two codes of conduct:
Code of Conduct for editors
Code of Conduct for publishers
12. COPE in collaboration with WAME (World association of medical editors) and others have
developed policy on “Principles of Transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing”
consisting of 16 essential parameters:
Journal website:
It must not contain information that might mislead readers or authors,
including any attempt to mimic another journal/publisher’s site
‘Aims & Scope’ statement
Statement on what a journal will consider for publication including authorship
criteria (e.g., not considering multiple submissions, redundant publications) to
be included
ISSNs should be clearly displayed (separate for print and electronic).
 Name of Journal: The Journal name shall be unique and not be one that is easily
confused with another journal or that might mislead potential authors and readers
about the Journal’s origin or association with other journals
Process of peer review: Peer review is defined as obtaining advice on individual
manuscripts from reviewers expert in the field who are not part of the journal’s
editorial staff
Journal content must be clearly marked as whether peer reviewed or not.
All processes as well as any policies related to the journal’s peer review
procedures, shall be clearly described on the journal website, including the
method of peer review used
Journal websites should not guarantee manuscript acceptance or very short peer
review times
15. Information about ownership and/ or management
16. Governing body: Members are recognized experts in the subject areas included within
the journal’s scope. The full names and affiliations of the journal’s editorial board or
other governing body shall be provided on the journal’s website.
17. Editorial team: Full names and affiliations of the journal’s editors
18. Copyright and Licensing:
The policy for copyright shall be clearly stated in the author guidelines and the
copyright holder named on all published articles
Likewise, licensing information shall be clearly described in guidelines on the
website, and licensing terms shall be indicated on all published articles, both
HTML and PDFs
If authors are allowed to publish under a Creative Commons license then any
specific license requirements shall be noted
Any policies on posting of final accepted versions or published articles on third
party repositories shall be clearly stated.
19. Author fees:
Any fees or charges that are required for manuscript processing and/or
publishing materials in the journal shall be clearly stated in a place that is easy
for potential authors to find prior to submitting their manuscripts for review or
explained to authors before they begin preparing their manuscript for
submission. If no such fees are charged that should also be clearly stated.
20. Process in relation to addressal of Research misconduct: Publishers and editors shall
take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research
misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism,

citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In no case shall

a journal or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such
misconduct to take place. In the event that a journal’s publisher or editors are made
aware of any allegation of research misconduct relating to a published article in their
journal, the publisher or editor shall follow COPE’s guidelines (or equivalent) in
dealing with allegations.
● Publication ethics: A journal shall also have policies on publishing ethics. These should
be clearly visible on its website, and should refer to:
Journal policies on authorship and contributorship
How the journal will handle complaints and appeals
Journal policies on conflicts of interest / competing interests
Journal policies on data sharing and reproducibility
Journal’s policy on ethical oversight
Journal’s policy on intellectual property
Journal’s options for post-publication discussions and corrections
● Publication schedule: The periodicity at which a journal publishes shall be clearly
indicated
● Access: The way(s) in which the journal and individual articles are available to readers
and whether there are associated subscription or pay per view fees shall be stated
● Archiving: A journal’s plan for electronic backup and preservation of access to the
journal content (for example, access to main articles via CLOCKSS or PubMedCentral)
in the event a journal is no longer published shall be clearly indicated
● Revenue sources: Business models or revenue sources (e.g., author fees, subscriptions,
advertising, reprints, institutional support, and organizational support) shall be clearly
stated or otherwise evident on the journal’s website. Publishing fees or waiver status
should not influence editorial decision making.
● Advertising: Journals shall state their advertising policy if relevant,
including what types of adverts will be considered, who makes decisions regarding
accepting adverts and whether they are linked to content or reader behavior (online
 only) or are displayed at random. Advertisements should not be related in any way to
editorial decision making and shall be kept separate from the published content.
Direct marketing: Any direct marketing activities, including solicitation of manuscripts
that are conducted on behalf of the journal, shall be appropriate, well targeted, and
unobtrusive. Information provided about the publisher or journal is expected to be
truthful and not misleading for readers or authors.
● COPE membership has following benefits:
Annual seminar for free
Website
Publication ethics audit tool
Access to COPE newsletter
E-learning programs
● CODE OF CONDUCT AND BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR JOURNAL EDITORS
Code of Conduct:
Should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors
Strive to constantly improve their journal
Have processes in place to assure the quality of the material they publish
Champion freedom of expression
Maintain the integrity of the academic record
Preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards
Always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when
needed
Accountable for everything published in their journals
Best practice for editors would include:
Actively seeking the views of authors, readers, reviewers and editorial
board members about ways of improving their journal’s processes
● Supporting initiatives designed to reduce research and publication misconduct
● Supporting initiatives to educate researchers about publication ethics
● Ensuring that all published reports and reviews of research have been reviewed by
suitably qualified reviewers
● Ensuring that non-peer-reviewed sections of their journal are clearly identified
● Informing readers about steps taken to ensure that submissions from members of the
journal’s staff or editorial board receive an objective and unbiased evaluation
 ● Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the
paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to
the remit of the journal
● A description of peer review processes should be published, and editors should be
ready to justify any important deviation from the described processes
● Journals should have a declared mechanism for authors to appeal against editorial
decisions
● Ensuring that appropriate reviewers are selected for submissions
● Publishing submission and acceptance dates for articles
● Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before
agreeing to review a submission
● Encouraging reviewers to comment on ethical questions and possible research and
publication misconduct raised by submissions
● Developing and maintaining a database of suitable reviewers and updating this on the
basis of reviewer performance
● Acting as ambassadors for the journal
● Supporting and promoting the journal
● Communicating regularly with their journal’s owner and publisher
● Editors should strive to ensure that peer review at their journal is fair,
unbiased and timely
Reviewing peer review practices periodically to see if improvement is possible
Having systems in place to detect falsified data
Editors should seek assurances that all research has been approved by an appropriate
body
Editors have a duty to act if they suspect misconduct or if an allegation of misconduct is
brought to them. This duty extends to both published and unpublished papers
Taking steps to reduce covert redundant publication
Ensuring that published material is securely archived
Adopting systems for detecting plagiarism
Supporting authors whose copyright has been breached or who have been the victims of
plagiarism
Authors of criticized material should be given the opportunity to respond
Studies reporting negative results should not be excluded
● WAME was established in 1955
 ● AIM:
Facilitate worldwide cooperation and communication among editors of peer reviewed
journals, improve editorial standards and promote professionalism in medical editing
through education, self-criticism and self regulation
Encourage research on principles and practice of medical editing
● Membership is free and open to all; small journals are well represented
● WAME Ethics and Policy committee covers broad areas like:
Ethics and professionalism
Authors
Conflict of interest
Global health and politics
Peer review
Policy archives
3.3 Conflicts of interest

● Conflicts of interest arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have interests that are not fully
apparent and that may influence their judgments on what is published
● Conflicts of interest in research are situations where professional objectivity may be
compromised, or perceived to be compromised, because of competing financial, personal, or
professional connections or personal values and stands. A conflict of interest exists when
professional judgment concerning a primary interest may be influenced by a secondary
interest.
● May limit objectivity in the publication process
● Types: Financial/ Tangible; Non-financial/ Intangible
● Financial: Sources of funds/grants for the research conducted, receipt of a consulting fee from
a company manufacturing the equipment used in the research, stocks in such a company, or
other financial connections that might influence an individual's thinking and affect the
research outcome. Some journals may require authors to declare not just any competing
financial connections they may have individually, but also any that their immediate family
members (spouse, parent, or child) may have, since these may also pose indirect conflicts of
interest.
● Non-financial: Personal relationships or professional affiliations; private or publicly held
beliefs and ideologies that can give rise to potential biases; professional rivalries
● Areas: Personal, Commercial, Political, Academic or Financial
 ● How to prevent it?
All concerned members should declare their interests properly, and should be
published in website
Complete disclosure of financial conflicts
Recognising scientific merits when conducting evaluation
Editors should clearly explain what should be disclosed
Ensure proper disclosure from the author
Withdraw from discussions, decisions if found beyond ability or area of expertise
If authors state no conflict of interest, publish confirmation of the same
● How one can identify and appropriately declare conflicts of interest in research:
List down all sources of financial support
List down any social or personal activities/interests that may be considered to
influence how you conduct your research
Review any institutional ties you may have in the present or have had in the recent past
(where you worked/volunteered, etc.) that can be said to affect your objectivity in your
work
Review and comply with all the guidelines provided by your target journal on what they
define as conflicts of interest and how they want authors to disclose them
Potential for conflicts and ways to deal with them are constantly evolving. Keep
yourself updated and seek out new information.
As per the US Office of Research Integrity, “Having a conflict of interest is not in itself
unethical, and some are unavoidable. Full transparency is always the best course of
action, and, if in doubt, disclose.”

3.4 Publication Misconduct: Definition, concept, problems that lead to unethical behavior
and vice versa, types

● Definition: Falsification, Fabrication or Plagairism in proposing, performing, or reviewing

research, or in reporting research results
● Problems that lead to unethical behavior:
Fabrication of data
Falsification of data
 Plagiarism
Other serious deviations from accepted practices
Other deception involving manipulation of data or experiments
Retaliation for good faith misconduct allegations
Interfering with misconduct investigation
Covering up misconduct
Failing to report misconduct
Making inappropriate or false misconduct allegations
Misuse of confidential information
Misappropriation of funds
Misappropriation of property/ destruction/ theft
Unethical authorship practices other than plagiarism
Misrepresentation of one’s credentials/ qualifications
Failure to disclose significant financial or other interests
Significant or material violations of regulations, laws or policies pertaining to human
subjects, animal research, biosafety, radiation safety and so on
● Types already covered in Module 2 (Falsification, Fabrication and Plagiarism)
● Nature of Plagiarism:
Word by word copying without acknowledging the source
Paraphrasing or abbreviated restatement without acknowledging
False citation
False data: Academic fraud
Unacknowledged multiple submission
Unacknowledged multiple authors or collaboration
Self Plagiarism/ Double submission
● UGC guidelines on levels of Plagiarism:

UGC recommendations: Plagiarism in submission of Thesis and

Dissertations

Level of similarities Characteristics Penalty

Level 0 Up to 10% No penalty

Level 1 Above 10% - 40% Submit revised script
within a stimulated time
 period not exceeding 6
months
Level 2 Above 40% - 60% Debarred from
submitting revised script
for a period of 1 year

Level 3 Above 60% Registration canceled

UGC recommendations: Plagiarism in Academic and Research

publications

Level of similarities Characteristics Penalty

Level 0 Up to 10% No penalty

Level 1 Above 10% - 40% Withdrawal of
manuscript
Level 2 Above 40% - 60% Withdrawal of
manuscript; Denied one
annual increment; Not
allowed to be a
supervisor for 2 years
Level 3 Above 60% Withdrawal of
manuscript; Denied two
succ annual increment;
Not allowed to be a
supervisor for years

● Similarity checks for plagiarism shall exclude:

All quoted work either falling under public domain or reproduced with all necessary
permission and/ or attribution
All references, bibliography, table of content, preface and acknowledgements
All small similarities of minor nature (common knowledge or coincidental terms upto
14 consecutive words)
All generic terms, laws, standard symbols and standard equations
● Plagiarism detection is the process of locating instances of plagiarism and/ or
copyright infringement within a work or document
● Plagiarism detection tools: Turnitin, iThenticate, Plagium and so on
3.5 Violation of publication ethics, authorship and contributorship

● Violation of publication ethics is a global problem which includes duplicate submission,

multiple submissions, plagiarism, gift authorship, fake affiliation, ghost authorship, pressured
authorship, salami publication and fraud (fabrication and falsification) but excludes the
honest errors committed by the authors
Data fabrication: Making up data or results
Data falsification: Manipulating research outcome via misrepresentation
Plagiarism: Presenting someone else's work or ideas as your own
Duplicate/ Multiple/ Redundant submission: Submitting the same or a very similar
manuscript to two or more journals
Fake affiliation: Wrong author and institution details
Salami publication: Publication of two or more articles derived from a single study
Gift authorship: Co-authorship awarded to a person who has not contributed
significantly to the study
Ghost authorship: Contribution to produce a paper excluded in the final publication
Guest authorship: Senior authors who are included because of their respect or
influence in the hope that this will increase the likelihood of publication and/or impact
of the paper once published
Pressured authorship: When a person uses their position of authority to obtain
authorship
● Causes behind violation: Academic pressure, Career growth, peer pressure, Incentives and so
on
● How to prevent?: DAIP and IAIP, Awareness programs, Counter-measures: Anti-Plagiarism
software, Strict adherence to journal guidelines, Clear authorship order, Clearance from ethics
committee, Informed consent and assent, Obtaining

rights and permissions wherever required

Authorship and Contributorship

● Authorship refers to list of authors who have contributed to the published work
● Contributorship refers to contributorship statement at the end of the paper, giving details of
who did what in planning, conducting, and reporting the work
● Authorship entails responsibility and accountability
● Author: “A Student or a faculty or a researcher or staff of HEI who claims to be the creator of
the work (intellectual) under consideration”
● Who can be credited as an author?
Made substantial contribution in
Research study (Design, Data acquisition, Analysis and Interpretation)
Drafting or revising the article for intellectual content
Approval of final version
Accountable for all aspects of work and Integrity of work
● Types of Authorship
Ghost: Authors whose significant contribution is not acknowledged
Guest: Authors included solely for the purpose of increasing acceptance rate of the
manuscript
Gift: Authors included despite any significant contribution
Surrogate: Written by someone else passed off as someone else’s
Anonymous: Publishing with anonymity; lacks transparency
● What causes authorship problems?
No authors specified
Author from unrelated domain
Unspecified role in acknowledgement
No significant contribution
Questionable roles
Unable to respond to reviewer’s comments
Similar articles published under different author names
Language quality differs in various sections of manuscript
● COPE guideline to minimize authorship problem
Submit: Adopt transparent policy as to who contributed
Encourage: Create awareness (ORCID, CRediT)
Behavior: Check unusual patterns of behavior
● If a meeting is convened to discuss about authorship involving all authors, authorship
problem may be countered
● WILEY guidelines:
Journals must specify clear authorship criteria
Journals should require confirmation from authors and co-authors
 Journals should ask authors for a short description of their contribution
Copyright transfer and Exclusive license agreements
Journal should require that all authors agree with the order of authorship
Encourage towards having unique IDs (ORCID) to bypass matching author names

3.6 Identification of publication misconduct, complaints and appeals

● What constitutes publication misconduct?
Fabrication
Falsification
Plagiarism
Duplicate submission
Salami publishing
Fake affiliation
Authorship problems
Violation of generally accepted research practices
Failure to adhere to legal requirements
Employing inappropriate statistical technique to enhance results
Exploring students for own benefit
Failure to maintain research data
○ Rejecting a manuscript without even reading it
● Responding to allegations of possible misconduct: Role of editorial
○ Journals should have a clear policy on handling misconduct
○ Journals should provide a platform and mechanism to appeal editorial decisions,
facilitate genuine appeals, and to discourage repeated or unfounded appeals
○ Journals should have an obligation towards publishing accurate work
○ All allegations of misconduct should be referred to Editor-in-chief
○ Allow appeals to override earlier decisions only in case if new information emerges
○ Journals should state that Editor’s decision following an appeal is final
○ A letter seeking explanation is to be sent to the person against whom complaint is
made
○ Editors should mediate all exchanges between authors and peer reviewers
3.7 Predatory publishers and journals
● Defined as “Systematic way for-profit publication of purportedly scholarly content in a
deceptive or fraudulent way without any appropriate review mechanism with regard to quality
assurance”

● Predatory Journals take advantage of authors by asking them to publish for a fee without
providing peer-review or editing services
● Exist solely for profit
● The focus of predatory or fake journals is to mirror real journals sufficiently so as to confuse
and attract young and inexperienced researchers to submit their manuscripts
● Hijacked journals are duplicate or fake websites of legitimate ones utilizing the title, ISSN and
other information of the reputable journal. They are often created by a malicious third party
for the purpose of fraudulently offering academicians the opportunity to rapidly publish their
research online for a fee.
● Characteristics of a predatory journal:
○ Attractive names that mimic high ranking legitimate journals
No website or website with no clarity
Unprofessional website layout
Guaranteed acceptance of manuscript upon submission
Invite submission from unrelated disciplines, beyond the stated scope of journal
No editorial board
Articles published are of varied lengths
Description of manuscript handling process is lacking
No retraction policy
Do not follow COPE or WAME guidelines
Hidden charges
Failure to mention copyright
Contact email address is non-journal affiliated
Usage of fake metrics (GIF, SJIF, IC…)
False claims
Editorial members without credentials
● How to find predatory journals and publishers?
Pay and Publish schemes
No peer review process
Article processing charges
Not listed in Directory of open access journals (DOAJ)
 Not listed in Ulrich’s periodicals directory
Not listed in major indexes
Publisher not a member of Open access scholarly publishers association (OASPA)
Listed in Beall’s list or Cabells’ predatory reports
● Role of academic community in fight against predatory publication: Researcher
Check whether journal is listed in DOAJ
Check whether publisher is a member of OASPA
Make sure journal is not listed in Cabells’ predatory reports
Consult research supervisor for guidance
● Check whether listed in Ulrich’s periodicals directory
● Follow updated UGC-CARE listed journals (Group I and Group II)
● Use journal selectors
● “Think-Check-Submit”
● Blacklist: Bealls’ blog, Cabell’s International
● White list: DOAJ, OASPA, COPE, Publons
● Journal selection: Elsevier journal finder, Springer journal suggester, JANE (Journal
author name estimator)….
● UGC has established “Consortium for Academic and Research Ethics” (CARE) for
creation and maintenance of “Reference List of Quality Journals”. CARE members
include Statutory Councils/ Academies/ Government bodies and others like the
Association of Indian Universities.
● The following are the reasons for the establishment of the CARE List:
To promote quality research, academic integrity, and publication
To prevent publications in dubious/predatory/sub-standard journals
To maintain the Reference UGC CARE List of Quality Journals
To develop a methodology and approach for good quality journal identification
● UGC-Care has divided whole list of journals into four main groups which are explained
here:
Group A: Research Journals from all disciplines which are indexed in Scopus
(Source List) or Web of Science
Group B: UGC Care List of Journals from the previous list which is qualified as
per the analysis protocols
 Group C: Recommended journals by UGC-CARE Council members from all
disciplines which are qualified as per the analysis protocols
Group D: Journals submitted by UGC-CARE Universities for all disciplines and
languages which are qualified as per the analysis protocols
The UGC-CARE List now has only TWO groups, instead of the
original FOUR groups to simplify the search
● How to Check UGC Approved Journal?
Step 1: Visit the official website of UGC CARE
Step 2: Register yourself by submitting the required details and create a
password carefully
Step 3: Log in to the website by using your email id and password
Step 4: Now, you can search for the journals that are categorized in Group I & II
3.8 iThenticate software for plagiarism detection (turnitin)

● Create account (Sign Up: First name, last name, email, country, time zone,
captcha, otp: mail)
● Login using username and password (Top right corner)
● Main navigation bar: Folders, Settings, Account Info
○ Folders: Main area of iThenticate; upload, manage and view documents
○ Settings: Contains configuration options for the iThenticate interface
○ Account Info: User profile and account usage; Manage your account
● Detailed description in Module 4
 Module 4: Open access publishing and Publication misconduct
Basic details

Module 4 Open Access Publishing, Publication Misconduct,

Software tools

Teaching hours (Practical hours) 08 (4+2+2)

Module 4: Overview of content

Open Access Publishing

● Open access publications and initiatives
● SHERPN/RoMEO online resource to check publisher copyright & self-archiving policies
● Software tool to identify predatory publications developed by SPPU
● Journal finder / journal suggestion tools viz.JANE, Elsevier Journal Finder, Springer Journal
Suggester, etc.
Publication Misconduct: Group discussions, and Software tools
Group Discussions:
● Subject specific ethical issues, FFP, Authorship
● Conflicts of interest
● Complaints and appeals: Examples and fraud from India and abroad
Software tools:
● Use of plagiarism software like Turnitin, Urkund and other open source software tools

4.1 Open access publications and initiatives

● Accessibility to research information is paramount for smooth and effective conduct of research
● Hence, access to publications in peer reviewed journals plays an important role
● Limitations in accessing research output:
High number of peer reviewed journals: A library obviously cannot gain access to all
available journals
High subscription fee
Limited library budget
● Open access refers to the practice of making peer-reviewed scholarly research and literature
freely available online to anyone interested in reading it
 ● Open access is a set of principles and a range of practices through which research outputs are
distributed online, free of access charges or other barriers; barriers to copying or reuse are also
reduced or removed by applying an open license for copyright.
● Types of open access (OA) publishing
Open Access Journals (OAJ)
Open Access Repositories (OAR): An open-access repository or open archive is a digital platform
that holds research output and provides free, immediate and permanent access to research results for
anyone to use, download and distribute
● Basic characteristics of OA publishing:
Free availability
Digital in nature
Mostly free for publishing, sometimes may avail processing fees
Free from copyright and licensing restrictions
Research oriented
Have editorial board and peer review process
● Open access has two different versions:
Gratis: Making research available for others to read without having to pay
for it, but does not grant the user the right to make copies, distribute, or modify the work
in any way beyond fair use (free of charge)
Libre: Libre open access is gratis, meaning the research is available free of charge, but it
goes further by granting users additional rights, usually via a Creative Commons license, so
that people are free to reuse and remix the research. (free of charge and free of use)
13. Open Access Strategies
Open access journals (Gold road): Gold open access articles are published in a journal that
is open access, which means the journal will handle hosting and distributing the journal
article in a free and open manner, without any fee or subscription charge; may involve
charge for publishing
Self archiving (Green road): Authors self-archive their articles by sharing them on their own
website, or more preferably, in their institution's Institutional Repository or in some other public
archive by themself or their representatives or right holders depending upon the policy of the publisher
where work is published
14. Routes of Open Access
Green open Access (Self archiving): Authors publish in scholarly, peer reviewed journals of
their choice; During the copyright transfer process, they secure rights to deposit a version
 of their article in an open access repository or post on a personal website. Works for both
pre-prints and post-prints
Gold open access: Authors publish directly in peer-reviewed open access journals; works
only for postprints; List available in DOAJ; Criteria to be considered open access (BOAI):
have editorial board, peer review process, research oriented. Works only for post prints
Hybrid open access: Mixture of open and closed access articles. Partially funded by
subscriptions; open access for only those articles for which authors have paid publication
fee
Bronze open access: Articles free to read on publisher page, but lack clearly identifiable
license; freely available journal article that has no open
license
Diamond/ Platinum open access: Journals which publish open access without charging
authors article processing charges; require funding from external sources
21. Selection criteria for inclusion in DOAJ
Subject: Scientific and Scholarly
Type: Periodicals that publish research or review papers in full text
Acceptable sources: Academic, Government, Commercial, Non-profit
Level: Primarily researchers
Content: Mainly research papers in full text
All languages
22. Open access movement emerged globally so as to increase accessibility to research output
Started in 1991: Paul Ginsparg
Objective: Output of public funded research should be made available to the public at large
without any barrier such as cost, access and copyright obligations
Major initiatives: Budapest Open Access Initiative (2001), Bethesda Statement on Open
Access Publishing (April 2003), Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the
Sciences and Humanities (October 2003)

Year Initiative
1991 Started by Paul Ginsparg (arXiv repository: free distribution
service)

1993 Project MUSE: Online database of peer reviewed journals

● Open access movement in India

 ● How to choose publications?
4.2 SHERPA/RoMEO online resource to check publisher copyright & self-archiving policies

● Sherpa (Securing a hybrid environment for research preservation and access) Romeo is an online
resource that aggregates and analyses publisher open access policies from around the world and
provides summaries of publisher copyright and open access archiving policies on a journal-by-
journal basis
● Upgradation via community contributions
● RoMEO’s (Rights MEtadata for Open archiving) own database covers around 22000 journals
● Aim is to establish institutional repositories and open access archiving
● Basically lists copyright and publishing policies thus helping authors in making key decisions
with respect to publication
● Gives publication information such as title, ISSNs, URL, Publishers
● Gives information regarding publisher policy such as OA fee, OA publishing, Embargo, Licence,
Copyright owner, Location and so on for Published, Accepted and Submitted versions
● If an academic author wants to put their research articles online, they are faced with an
increasingly complex situation. Some publishers prohibit authors from using their own articles.
Others allow it, but only under certain conditions. RoMEo helps to clarify the situation. RoMEO
contains publishers’ general policies on self-archiving of journal articles and certain conference
series. It provides information regarding what version of an article can be deposited, and under
what conditions?, and so on.

4.3 Software tool to identify predatory publications developed by SPPU

● Predatory journals are a global threat. They accept articles for publication without performing
necessary quality checks for issues such as plagiarism or ethical approval.
● Think Check Submit campaign
● A predatory journal is an opportunistic publishing venue that exploits the academic need to
publish but offers little reward for those using their services.
● Deceptive publishing: Write only for the purpose of publishing
● Motivation: Publish or Perish, Ease of launching online journals
● Why is it bad?
Creates confusion
Promotes shoddy scholarship
Wastes resources
● Definition: Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the
expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from
best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/ or the use of aggressive and
indiscriminate solicitation practices
● Characteristics
Money making is the primary goal
Do not care about quality of work being published
Weak peer review process
Make false claims and promises
Fail to follow accepted standards and best practices
Engage in unethical practices
Too much campaigning
Appointing false academicians to the editorial board
Copying or mimicking names of popular journals
Non existent Impact factors
● Eriksson and Helgesson’s 25 features of predatory journals:
Not a member of professional body committed to best practices
Not indexed
False claims
Unfamiliar to most
Existing papers are of poor quality
Lot of errors in published papers
Website does not look professional
Lack of credible information in website such as editorial board, location and so on
Publishing schedule is not clearly stated
Mimics or copies popular journals
Misleading Imoact factor
Non-academic advertisements in website
High volume publishing in a very short span of time
Articles out of scope
Poor email etiquette; contradictory claims
Lack of strong peer review process
No copyright agreement description
● Tips to identify predatory journals
Low h-indices
 Invitations from conferences
Too wide a scope (too many fields)
Relatively unknown speakers
● Software tools to identify predatory publications developed by SPPU
Set guidelines for considering a journal to be a good one: Publishing for at least 5 years,
genuine website, reputed academicians, associated with reputed professional bodies, and
so on
Papers published in private in-house journals, proceedings of workshops, seminars,
refresher/ orientation courses should not be considered as research publication
Universities should develop a comprehensive department wise list of quality journals and
reputed publications in each subject to be used as mark of standard in research processes
Mere ISSN not sufficient for qualifying as a peer-reviewed journal
Record of citations in other reputed journals
Do not rely on just one metrics in ascertaining quality of a journal
Due recognition to languages other than English should be given, all the while following a
transparent and quality conscious process
Faculty wise expert list should be developed at university level with utmost care and due
diligence
List of quality journals should be displayed in university website, and should be reviewed
and updated every year; utmost care should be taken before including a journal in the
university list, keeping in mind the rise of fake and counterfeit journals
Beall’s list can be referred
RPE and guidelines should be widely circulated, and undertaking should be taken from research guides
and scholars for adherence to the same
Research articles, Thesis and such research works should go through Departmental
Research Committee consisting of internal and external experts duly approved by Vice-
Chancellor
Anti-plagiarism tools to be made mandatory
Awareness programs regarding predatory publishing at university level
Quality of work to be judged by external experts anonymously
Universities should bring in external peer review system to critically evaluate its research
output
Necessary guidelines and comprehensive department wise lists of Journals in each subject
should be published in University Annual report and displayed prominently on University
website
 UGC has set up CARE to promote ethics in research
Publications in predatory journals will be assessed during a university’s accreditation
process
● Consequences of publishing in predatory journals
Damage to reputation
Research based on works from predatory journals may lead to wrong conclusions
Lack of quality control
Lack of reproducibility
Work could disappear/ Loss of information: Predatory journals do not care to set up an IT
infrastructure to ensure information preservation, as cost effectiveness and money making
is the sole purpose
Work will be hard to find
Concealed conflict of interests: Eg: Wakefield case study
● Cabell’s Predatory reports is the only searchable database that identifies deceptive and fraudulent
journals using 74 weighted behavioral indicators
● Journalytics database is an complete source for Journal info, evaluation metrics, and submission
details
● Journal evaluation metrics: Audience, Relevance, Quality, Peer review, Policies, Publication
practices
● How to avoid predatory publishers?
Use Cabell’s predatory reports and Journalytics
APA questionnaire: Informal email tone, Unprofessional website
PsycINFO journal coverage list

4.4 Journal finder/ journal suggestion tools: JANE, Elsevier Journal Finder, Springer
Journal Suggester, etc.

Journal finder tools

● Journal finder tools helps a researcher in locating the best suited journal for publishing his/ her
research work
● Journal finder identifies highly ranked journals based on some standard metrics such as Scopus
or Journal Citation Reports (JCR)
● How to select best suited journal for my article?
Make a List of the Journals Available: Consulting your peers, searching through
online listings, and checking with professional associations
 Determine the Impact of the Journal: Impact Factor, Journal Rank, Article
Influence, and h-Index are used to determine the impact of the journal
Make Sure the Journal Scope and Policies match your Needs: Helps in
anticipating any situations that may emerge during the submission and peer review
process
Check the Journal Requirements and Distribution: Most journals have a certain
style for the article. The article must be consistent with the requirements of the journal.
Collect Information about the Journal’s Peer Review Process: Stature of
reviewers, objectivity, and timelines, should be gleaned from a variety of sources. Actual
values or estimates of rejection rates should be obtained.
Check the “Instructions for Authors” thoroughly: Certain additional information
for the authors that one must keep in mind before submitting the manuscript: Page limit,
Conflict of interest, Archiving policies, Copyright policies, Author rights, and so on
● JANE (Journal/ Author name estimator)
Objectives:
Assisting authors in right journal selection
Assiting authors in finding relevant articles to cite
Assisting editors in finding right reviewers
How?
Just enter the title and/or abstract of the paper in the box, and click on 'Find
journals', 'Find authors' or 'Find Articles'. Jane will then compare your document to
millions of documents in PubMed to find the best matching journals, authors or
articles
Instead of using a title or abstract, you can also search using a keyword search,
similar to popular web search engines
Find journals: Upon search, JANE gives out a list of journals sorted with decreasing
level of confidence and article influence. List of similar articles can also be seen with
similarity index.
Article influence measures how often articles in the journal are cited within the first
5 years of its publication
Types of journal measures
JANE relies on the data in PubMed, which can contain papers from predatory journals,
and therefore these journals can appear in JANE's results. To help identify high-quality
 journals, JANE now tags journals that are currently indexed in MEDLINE, and open
access journals approved by the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
Updated on a monthly basis
Includes papers published in last 10 years
Database works by searching gor 50 articles most similar to the given input. For each of
these articles, similarity score is calculated. The similarity scores of all the articles
belonging to a certain journal or author are summed to calculate the confidence score for
the journal or the author.
Information sent to JANE server is not stored
● Elsevier Journal finder
EJF uses paper title, abstract, keywords, field of research in helping researchers to select
appropriate journals
Smart search can be done by refining the search for: Publication type (Gold OA,
Subscription), Journal Impact (Cite score, Impact factor, 0:10+), Review and publication
time (Time to 1st decision, Time to publication)
Powered by the Elsevier Fingerprint Engine
● Springer Journal Suggester
Uses semantic technology to help researchers in selecting appropriate journals out of 2500
springer and BioMed central journals
Researchers can specify acceptance rate, impact factor threshold, maximum time to first
decision, indexing services so as to narrow down the search
● Wiley Journal Suggester
● Wiley Journal finder
● SJFInder
● JournalGuide
● Think Check Submit

4.5 Subject specific ethical issues: Engineering ethics

● Click on this link to read about Engineering ethics in detail

● Article 1: Social Responsibility to Uphold Ethical Values of the Society:
Public safety: Safety, health and welfare of public
Compliance with social order: Laws of land, local customs
Impartiality and fairness: Irrespective of caste, color, nationality
Environment protection and improvement
 ● Article 2: Responsibility to maintain high standards of professional quality:
Development of technical and managerial skills
Undertake assignment where professionally competent: Only if skilled
Performance responsibility
Proper verification of documents and production processes
● Article 3: Obligation to Maintain High Standard of Personal Behaviour in a Responsible Manner
Honesty and integrity in professional dealing
Compensation for services rendered
Professional opinion
Professional relationship with the employer
Information communication with employers
Mutual obligation and trust
Self promotion: Do not indulge
Employers’ business secrets
Personal conflict: Conflict of interest
4.6 Complaints and appeals: examples and fraud from India and abroad

● Scientific plaigiarism in India

● Frauds in Indian scientific research
● Kerala university faculty in research fraud row
● Disentangling the epidemic of scientific misconduct
4.7 Software tools

● Turnitin
Paid web based software to check plagiarism
Create turnitin account and login
Create class using Add class button and filling in necessary details like class name, subject,
student level and so on
Go inside the class, and create assignment using Add assignment button by filling in
necessary details
Go to action:view button
Select file and submit by filling in necessary details
Single file upload
Multiple file upload
Cut and paste upload
Zip upload
 Keep on refreshing until you get similarity index
Color coded matching
Use document viewer in the top left corner to download pdf version of similarity
report
User Manual
Key determinants in similarity checking
Speed of the internet
Online availability of databases
Digitization
Filtering tools used
○ Documents in regional languages
○ Similarity % varies from tool to tool
● Ouriginal
● Difference between turnitin and original

Module 5: Databases and Research metrics

Basic details

Module 5 Databases and Research metrics

Teaching hours (Practical hours) 07 (4+3)

Module 5: Overview of content

Databases
● Indexing databases
● Citation databases: Web of Science, Scopus….
Research Metrics
● Impact factor of journal as per journal citation report, SNIP, SJR, IPP, Cite Score
● Metrics: h-index, g-index, i-10index, altmetrics

5.1 Indexing databases

● Indexing is the process of creating indexes for record collections. Having indexes allows researchers to
more quickly find records for specific individuals; without them, researchers might have to look through
hundreds or thousands of records to locate an individual record.
● It also represents a number referring to a list of terms, definitions, topics etc. arranged in alphabetical order
in order to efficiently guide the readers to the desired information within the content. Indexing facilitates
the organization of literature in such a manner that makes the document of interest easily identifiable by the
readers.
● How indexing is done?: The indexer usually receives a set of page proofs for the journal at the same stage
when the document is undergoing final proofreading. The indexer requires the page proofs, to make a list
of headings and subheadings (term to appear in the index) and the location of each pertinent reference.
After completion of the rough index, it is edited for structure, clarity and consistency, formatted to
specifications, proofread and submitted to the client as final soft copy.The time period for indexing
depends on the length of manuscript. The more the content of the manuscript, the more time it will take to
be indexed.
● Why Indexing?
The function of an index is to give users systematic and effective shortcuts to the information they
need
Indexes are needed for any information collection, except the very smallest
● Benefits of Indexing
Researchers gain access to the most recent literature, even if it has not yet been indexed by other
sources
Automatic set-up of holdings means zero administration
Faster results with fewer headaches through automatic e-journal results included with every
database search
Keeps users on top of their areas of interest with a single place to manage Journal Alerts and Search
Alerts
Organized way
● Challenges in Indexing
Scope of coverage depends on a library or institution's subscription; their terms may not provide
complete coverage or access to full text articles
Database access usually requires a subscription or an affiliation to an institution; they are not free
A simple keyword search tends to yield too many results or items that may not be relevant to your
topic
Usually gives fewer results than a keyword search
Sometimes using truncation or limiters can disable other search features, depending on the database
5.2 Citation databases: Web of Science, Scopus….

Nowadays enhancing credibility based on our own research solely depends on to what extent our research reaches
a wider audience. The era of digitization and OA has enhanced its value.

Concept of Citation
15. A formal reference to a published or unpublished source that you consulted and obtained
information from while writing your research paper
16. Citation means when one paper explicitly refers to another paper with reference given in bibliography
17. Major performance indicator: Reflects Impact and quality of research
18. Symbolizes conceptual association of scientific ideas
19. Citation: Author’s name, date of publication, title of the work being cited, title of the journal, vol and issue
numbers, page numbers, DOI

Importance of Citation

23. Authors use citation to give proper credit to source work

24. Used as Performance indicator in evaluating performance of research groups,
departments and institutions

● Avoids Plagiarism
● Citation reflects the amount of work author has done towards his/ her work
● Helps in locating quality papers for upcoming researchers

Self Citation

● Self citation is when author cites his earlier research works in his forthcoming paper
. − ( − ℎ )

● Self-citation rate in % (author) = .

* 100

Citation Databases

● Citation databases are collections of referenced papers/ articles/ books and other material entered into an
online system (database) in a structured and consistent way
● Scopus:
Scopus-Elsevier is a source-neutral abstract and citation database which was launched in 2004
Content: Health Sciences, Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Social Sciences
Peer reviewed journals, book series, trade publications
All journals covered in Scopus database are reviewed each year to ensure high quality standards
 Scopus gives 4 types of quality measure: h-index, CiteScore, SJR (SCImago Journal rank), SNIP
(Source Normalized Impact per Paper)

● Web of Science (WoS):

Global citation database; World’s first citation index
Dr Eugene Garfield
Powerful research engine connecting academics, government and millions of researchers
WoS provides access to 3 major databases: Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities
WoS core collection consists of 4 online databases: SCIE (Science citation index expanded), SSCI
(Social sciences citation index), AHCI (Arts & Humanities citation index), ESCI (Emerging sources
citation index)
Researchers can use Master Journal List, a free tool which helps in navigating all titles currently
covered in WoS; also helps librarians to keep track of publication landscape

● Google Scholar:
Google scholar citations is free of charge
Provides i/f about citations of authors by tracking online journals, book chapters, conference
papers, web pages and so on
Easy to set up if one has an existing google account
Tracks academic articles, thesis, book titles towards citation metrics
Helps in locating relevant data for researchers in a scientific way via advanced search option
Provides in-depth details pertaining to a document
Individual scholar can also set up his/ her own Google scholar profile
Limitation: Fails to recognize and exclude predatory sources

● Citeseer
The first digital library and search engine to provide an autonomous citation indexing system which
indexes academic literature in electronic format

Comparison of citation databases

Characteristics Scopus WoS Google Scholar

Date of official 2004 2004 2004
inauguration

Developer/ Owner Elsevier (Netherlands) Thomson Scientific and Google Inc., (USA)
Health Care Corporation
(USA)

No. of Journals 21000 8700 No data

 Languages English + 30 English + 45 English plus any language

Focus (Field) Physical Sciences, Health Science, Technology, Biology, Engineering,

Sciences, Life Sciences, Social Sciences, Arts & Social Sciences, Arts &
Social Sciences Humanities Humanities, Chemistry,
Business, Administration,
Finance & Economics

Period covered 1966 - present 1900 - present Theoretically covers all

which is available
electronically

Content: Abstract (+) (+) (+)

Authors (+) (+) (+)

Citations (+) (+) (+)

Patents (+) (+) (-)

Updating 1- 2 times weekly Weekly Monthly

Databases covered Medline, Embase, SCIE, SSCI, AHCI, ESCI PubMed, OCLC first
Geobase, Biobase search

5.3 Research Metrics

Journal level Metrics

Impact Factor (IF)

● Metric for assessing journal performance/ quality

● Initially designed in 1960 to assist librarians in collection management
● Released annually based on WoS Journal Citation Reports (JCR)
● Journals only in SCIE and SSCI can have IF
● Impact Factor is calculated by dividing the number of citations in the JCR year by the total number of
articles published in the two previous years. An Impact Factor of 1.0 means that, on average, the articles
published one or two year ago have been cited one time.

● Average no. of citations received by articles in a journal within a 2 year window

● Impact Factor of 2021 = A/B
A = No. of citations received in one year in relation to content published in journal during previous
2 years (say 2019 and 2020)
B= Total no. of articles and reviews published within the previous 2 years (say
 2019 and 2020)
● Does not include editorials and letters to the editor

Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)

● SNIP measures citations received relative to citations expected for the subject field
● Makes cross-discipline comparisons easier between journals
● Published twice a year, and looks at a 3 year period
● SNIP is calculated as the number of citations given in the present year to publications in the past three
years divided by the total number of publications in the past three years.
● Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) measures contextual citation impact by weighting citations
based on the total number of citations in a subject field. The impact of a single citation is given higher
value in subject areas where citations are less likely, and vice versa.

● Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) is a sophisticated metric that intrinsically accounts for field-
specific differences in citation practices. It does so by comparing each journal's citations per publication
with the citation potential of its field, defined as the set of publications citing that journal.

● Calculated value of SNIP = RIP (Raw Impact per paper) = A/B

A = Journal citation count per paper
B = Citation potential in the field

SJR (SCImago Journal rank)

● The SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator is a measure of the scientific influence of scholarly journals
that accounts for both the number of citations received by a journal and the importance or prestige of the
journals where the citations come from
● It is also a prestige metric based on the idea that "all citations are not created equal." With SJR, the subject
field, quality and reputation of the journal has a direct effect on the value of a citation
● A journal's SJR indicator is a numeric value representing the average number of weighted citations
received during a selected year per document published in that journal during
the previous three years, as indexed by Scopus. Higher SJR indicator values are meant to indicate greater
journal prestige.
● If scientific impact is considered related to the number of endorsements in the form of citations a journal
receives, then prestige can be understood as a combination of the number of endorsements and the prestige
or importance of the journals issuing them. The SJR indicator assigns different values to citations
depending on the importance of the journals where they come from. This way, citations coming from
 highly important journals will be more valuable and hence will provide more prestige to the journals
receiving them. The calculation of the SJR indicator is similar to the Eigenfactor score, with the former
being based on the Scopus database and the latter on the Web of Science database. There are some
differences although.
● The SJR indicator computation is carried out using an iterative algorithm that distributes prestige values
among the journals until a steady-state solution is reached. The SJR algorithm begins by setting an
identical amount of prestige to each journal, then using an iterative procedure, this prestige is redistributed
in a process where journals transfer their achieved prestige to each other through citations. The process
ends up when the difference between journal prestige values in consecutive iterations do not reach a
minimum threshold value any more. The process is developed in two phases, (a) the computation of
Prestige SJR (PSJR) for each journal: a size-dependent measure that reflects the whole journal prestige, and
(b) the normalization of this measure to achieve a size-independent measure of prestige, the SJR indicator
● SJR is calculated as:
SJR of current year = A/B, where
A = Average no. of weighted citations in a given year
B = No. of articles published in the previous 3 years

IPP (Impact per publication)

● IPP - Impact Per Publication: Also known as RIP (raw impact per publication), the IPP is used to calculate
SNIP. It is almost same as SNIP. IPP is number of current-year citations to papers from the previous 3
years, divided by the total number of papers in those 3 previous years.
Cite Score

● A relatively new metric that helps researchers in tracking journal performance and make decisions
● CiteScore is the number of citations received by a journal in one year to documents published in the three
previous years, divided by the number of documents indexed in Scopus published in those same three years
● Cite Score value = A/B, Where
A = Citations received by a journal in one year to documents published in the three previous years
B = Number of documents indexed in Scopus published in those same three years

Author-level Metrics

h-index

● Introduced by Jorge Hirsch in 2005; also known as Hirsch index or Hirsch number
 ● The h-index is a number intended to represent both the productivity and the impact of a particular scientist
or scholar, or a group of scientists or scholars (such as a departmental or research group).
● The h-index is calculated by counting the number of publications for which an author has been cited by
other authors at least that same number of times.
● For instance, an h-index of 17 means that the scientist has published at least 17 papers that have each been
cited at least 17 times. If the scientist's 18th most cited publication was cited only 10 times, the h-index
would remain at 17. If the scientist's 18th most cited publication was cited 18 or more times, the h-index
would rise to 18.
● h-index = the number of publications (h) with a citation number greater than or equal to h; For example, 15
publications cited 15 times or more, is a h-index of 15.
● Part of the purpose of the h-index is to eliminate outlier publications that might give a skewed picture of a
scientist's impact. For instance, if a scientist published one paper many years ago that was cited 9,374
times, but has since only published papers that have been cited 2 or 3 times each, a straight citation count
for that scientist could make it seem
that his or her long-term career work was very significant. The h-index, however, would be much lower,
signifying that the scientist's overall body of work was not necessarily as significant.

g-index

● Suggested by Leo Egghe in 2006

● The index is calculated based on the distribution of citations received by a given researcher's publications,
such that given a set of articles ranked in decreasing order of the number of citations that they received, the
g-index is the unique largest number such that the top g articles received together at least g squared
citations. Hence, a g-index of 10 indicates that the top 10 publications of an author have been cited at least
100 times
● A g-index of 20 means that an academic has published at least 20 articles that combined have received at
least 400 (20 squared) citations. However, unlike the h-index these citations could be generated by only a
small number of articles.
● An example of two authors that both published 10 papers, both authors have a h-index of 6. However,
Author 1 have a g-index of 10 while Author 2 have a g-index of 7.
i-10 index

● Used only in Google Scholar

● Number of publications with at the least 10 citations

Article level metrics

Altmetrics

● In scholarly and scientific publishing, altmetrics are proposed as an alternative or complement to

more traditional citation impact metrics, such as impact factor and h-index
● Used to track and analyze online activity around scholarly outputs; encapsulates multiple digital
indicators related to a scholarly work
● Measure of attention a research output gets from various sources
● It is a quantitative measure of the attention a specific article has received in public policy
documents, wikipedia references, mainstream news, social networks, blogs and even social media
platforms
● The three main factors used to calculate AAS (Altmetric Attention Score) are:
○ Volume: Score rises as more people mention it; only 1 mention per source is counted
○ Sources: Each source has a weightage, for example, a newspaper article contributes more
than a blog post, which contributes more than a tweet
○ Authors
○ The AAS represents a weighted approximation of all the attention that has been picked up
by a research output. The score is derived from an automated algorithm, and represents a
weighted count of the amount of attention a research output has picked up.
○ Weightage detail
Altmetric donut