I Publish in I Edit? - Do Editorial Board Members of Urologic Journals Preferentially Publish Their Own Scientific Work?

PLOS ONE, Dec 2019

Scientists who are members of an editorial board have been accused of preferentially publishing their scientific work in the journal where they serve as editor. Reputation and academic standing do depend on an uninterrupted flow of published scientific work and the question does arise as to whether publication mainly occurs in the self-edited journal. This investigation was designed to determine whether editorial board members of five urological journals were more likely to publish their research reports in their own rather than in other journals. A retrospective analysis was conducted for all original reports published from 2001–2010 by 65 editorial board members nominated to the boards of five impact leading urologic journals in 2006. Publications before editorial board membership, 2001–2005, and publications within the period of time as an editorial board member, 2006–2010, were identified. The impact factors of the journals were also recorded over the time period 2001–2010 to see whether a change in impact factor correlated with publication locality. In the five journals as a whole, scientific work was not preferentially published in the journal in which the scientists served as editor. However, significant heterogeneity among the journals was evident. One journal showed a significant increase in the amount of published papers in the ‘own’ journal after assumption of editorship, three journals showed no change and one journal showed a highly significant decrease in publishing in the ‘own’ journal after assumption of editorship.

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0083709&type=printable

I Publish in I Edit? - Do Editorial Board Members of Urologic Journals Preferentially Publish Their Own Scientific Work?

et al. (2013) I Publish in I Edit? - Do Editorial Board Members of Urologic Journals Preferentially Publish Their Own Scientific Work?. PLoS ONE 8(12): e83709. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0083709 I Publish in I Edit? - Do Editorial Board Members of Urologic Journals Preferentially Publish Their Own Scientific Work? Jens Mani 0 Jasmina Makarevi c 0 Eva Juengel 0 Hanns Ackermann 0 Karen Nelson 0 Georg Bartsch 0 Axel Haferkamp 0 Roman A. Blaheta 0 Frank Havemann, Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany 0 1 Department of Urology, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University , Frankfurt am Main, Germany , 2 Institute of Biostatistics, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University , Frankfurt am Main, Germany , 3 Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University , Frankfurt am Main , Germany Scientists who are members of an editorial board have been accused of preferentially publishing their scientific work in the journal where they serve as editor. Reputation and academic standing do depend on an uninterrupted flow of published scientific work and the question does arise as to whether publication mainly occurs in the self-edited journal. This investigation was designed to determine whether editorial board members of five urological journals were more likely to publish their research reports in their own rather than in other journals. A retrospective analysis was conducted for all original reports published from 2001-2010 by 65 editorial board members nominated to the boards of five impact leading urologic journals in 2006. Publications before editorial board membership, 2001-2005, and publications within the period of time as an editorial board member, 2006-2010, were identified. The impact factors of the journals were also recorded over the time period 2001-2010 to see whether a change in impact factor correlated with publication locality. In the five journals as a whole, scientific work was not preferentially published in the journal in which the scientists served as editor. However, significant heterogeneity among the journals was evident. One journal showed a significant increase in the amount of published papers in the 'own' journal after assumption of editorship, three journals showed no change and one journal showed a highly significant decrease in publishing in the 'own' journal after assumption of editorship. - . These authors contributed equally to this work. Academic publishing occurs in a situation where intellectual, financial, and occasional political interest may enter into the publishing process [1]. Hearsay intimates that scientists who are members of an editorial board preferentially publish their scientific work in the journal where they serve as editor. Although editorial board members, as academically active clinicians and researchers, are allowed to publish in their own journal, a type of camaraderie [2] has been proposed to exist which may facilitate the review process. National and international reputation and academic standing all depend on an uninterrupted flow of published scientific work. Coauthorship, while fellow staff members climb the medical career ladder, is likewise important since clinical and scientific influence and an extended network stem from fellow associates being promoted. Finally, medical research financing is often determined by the sum of publications, particularly in high impact journals. With this in mind, preferential publishment of scientific work in the journal where the scientist serves as editor might open the way to scientific and private misconduct with considerable effects on the scientific community as a whole. A former editor has postulated that publication policy is biased [3], while journal editors maintain that fair standards apply to their journals peer review processes. Notwithstanding, publication bias is a broadly perceived preconception. Unfortunately, most journals do not have a written policy, readily available to their readers and authors, regarding manuscript submission by editorial board members [2]. Analysis of journal transparency has revealed that the majority of journals are not explicit enough in their instructions for authors [4] and the lack of transparency may promote accusations of insider favoritism [2,5]. Haivas et al. have noted that although many journals now publish authors financial conflicts of interest, and reviewers are asked to declare if they have a conflict of interest with regard to individual manuscripts, little is known about editors conflicts of interest and the mechanisms to manage them [6]. Most editors do not release information regarding the evaluation of manuscripts submitted by their own editorial board members [7]. It is, therefore, not surprising that reports dealing with self-publication practices of journal editors are sparse. Indeed, it is unclear, whether editorial board members tend to change their publication behaviour before and after acquiring journal editorship. To shed more light on (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0083709&type=printable

Jens Mani, Jasmina Makarević, Eva Juengel, Hanns Ackermann, Karen Nelson, Georg Bartsch, Axel Haferkamp, Roman A. Blaheta. I Publish in I Edit? - Do Editorial Board Members of Urologic Journals Preferentially Publish Their Own Scientific Work?, PLOS ONE, 2013, Volume 8, Issue 12, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083709