Home   »   Resources

Publishing Ethics Resources

In celebration of the first-ever unofficial “Publishing Ethics Week,” we are excited to share this special collection of resources from a host of scholarly publishing organizations. Scholarly communications and publishing organizations across the industry are invited to collaborate on raising awareness of publishing ethics by contributing content, programming, or resources that highlight issues of publishing ethics. We welcome collaborators of all kinds.

American Chemical Society   Journal of Ethics in Publishing
AUPresses   Learned Publishing
Coalition for Diversity in Scholarly Communications (C4DISC)   Library Publishing Coalition 
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)   Paths in Publishing
European Association of Science Editors   Society for Scholarly Publishing
MPS in Publishing, GWU    

Note: The page is a living document and will be updated throughout the week as additional resources come in. Interested in participating in Publishing Ethics Week? Submit your resource or email Jacklyn Lord, SSP’s Marketing and Operations Manager, for more information.


American Chemical Society

^ back to top


^ back to top

Coalition for Diversity in Scholarly Communications (C4DISC)

Toolkits for Equity

^ back to top

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Accessibility

  • Diversity and inclusivity discussion document
    This guidance serves to being the process of addressing DEI issues in scholarly publishing with initial recommendations for the promotion of social justice and equality within scholarly publishing are around four major themes: 

    • identifying subjects of discrimination,
    • representational issues in workforce discrimination and marginalisation, 
    • impact of discriminatory practices in peer review and editorial decision-making, 
    • and the marginalisation of research topics through citation lexicons and algorithms.
  • Diversity, equity and inclusion in scholarly research and publishing, COPE seminar 2021
    The impact of discriminatory practices in editorial processes and peer review, promoting of social justice and equality in scholarly publishing, best practices around identity and name changes, including examples of implementation, and addressing historical offensive content.


Representation and editorial boards

Bias in peer review

  • Bias in peer review webinar
    A COPE Forum discussion following a survey of COPE members. The Forum asked the questions:

    • How does your publication/organisation attempt to manage the effects of bias in peer review?
    • How is your publication/organisation working to invite a more diverse range of editors and peer reviewers?
    • Does your publication/organisation ask peer reviewers to ensure not only that the correct references are cited but also that the references reflect a diverse range of authors?

^ back to top

European Association of Science Editors (EASE)

  • EASE Ethics Checklist for Authors
    The EASE Ethics Checklist for Authors is intended for use by authors submitting to scientific journals during or soon after manuscript submission, to make formal declarations of the ethical integrity of the research, and information on any issues which must be provided to editorial offices.
  • EASE Standard Retraction Form
    This retraction template checklist was designed to support editors when preparing a retraction notice, and help researchers analyse retractions
  • EASE Editorial School for journal editors
    This four-module online training course has been designed in a collaboration between our Training Committee and our Regional Chapters. The course is held over four weeks, with one 2hour module each week, and is aimed at helping our member editors make their journals more visible, impactful, and full of engaging material. Using case studies the course challenges participants to discuss and identify suitable solutions for their own journal environments.

    • Module 1: Journal structure and management
    • Module 2: Publishing ethics for editors
    • Module 3: Peer review process
    • Module 4: Promotion and indexing

The course is repeated each day to include different timezones. There is a final online quiz/exam. Full details including costs and registration links can be read on the EASE website.

  • Webinar: The Dark Side of Science: Misconduct in Biomedical Research
    Tuesday, 18 October 2022 from 1pm-2pm UK time
    Elisabeth Bik is an image forensics detective who left her paid job in industry to search for and report biomedical articles that contain errors or data of concern. She speaks about misconduct in this free webinar from EASE.

^ back to top

George Washington University, MPS in Publishing

^ back to top

Journal of Ethics in Publishing

^ back to top

Learned Publishing

  • Frandsen, T.F. (2022), Authors publishing repeatedly in predatory journals: An analysis of Scopus articles. Learned Publishing. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1489
  • Jiang, X. and Shi, Y. (2022), Editorial bias in top-tier education journals: Factors influencing publishable scholarship in China. Learned Publishing. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1486
  • Zhang, L., Wei, Y., Sivertsen, G. and Huang, Y. (2022), The motivations and criteria behind China’s list of questionable journals. Learned Publishing. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1456
  • Roscoe, J. (2022), The need for accelerated change in diversity, equity and inclusion in publishing and learned societies. Learned Publishing. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1457
  • Helgesson, G., Radun, I., Radun, J. and Nilsonne, G. (2022), Editors publishing in their own journals: A systematic review of prevalence and a discussion of normative aspects. Learned Publishing, 35: 229-240. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1449
  • Jorm, A.F. (2022), Publons as a source of high volume, poorly targeted reviewer requests: The need for better standards of practice by publishers. Learned Publishing, 35: 285-287. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1420
  • Teixeira da Silva, J.A. and Vuong, Q.-H. (2022), Fortification of retraction notices to improve their transparency and usefulness. Learned Publishing, 35: 292-299. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1409
  • MacFarlane, A. (2022), The importance of effective data sharing and reuse to funders and others supporting research. Learned Publishing, 35: 71-74. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1443
  • Herbet, M.-E., Leonard, J., Santangelo, M.G. and Albaret, L. (2022), Dissimulate or disseminate? A survey on the fate of negative results. Learned Publishing, 35: 16-29. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1438
  • Araújo, R.J., Shideler, G.S. and Reamer, M.B. (2021), Chief editors in aquatic science and communication are more likely to oversee editorial boards from their own regions. Learned Publishing, 34: 547-557. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1393
  • Zhu, H. (2021), Home country bias in academic publishing: A case study of the New England Journal of Medicine. Learned Publishing, 34: 578-584. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1404
  • Ndungu, M.W. (2021), Scholarly journal publishing standards, policies and guidelines. Learned Publishing, 34: 612-621. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1410
  • Baveye, P.C. (2021), Objectivity of the peer-review process: Enduring myth, reality, and possible remedies. Learned Publishing, 34: 696-700. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1414
  • Rowley, J. and Sbaffi, L. (2021), Investigating gender differences in journal selection decisions: A survey of academic researchers. Learned Publishing, 34: 294-304. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1345
  • Miao, W. and Huang, Y. (2021), Politics matters: The power dynamics behind Chinese English-language humanities and social science journals. Learned Publishing, 34: 331-338. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1364
  • Rousi, A.M. (2021), Ethical review and informed consent guidelines of high impact anthropology, business, and education research journals. Learned Publishing, 34: 339-346. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1368
  • Moskovitz, C. (2021), Standardizing terminology for text recycling in research writing. Learned Publishing, 34: 370-378. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1372
  • Kendall, G. (2021), Beall’s legacy in the battle against predatory publishers. Learned Publishing, 34: 379-388. <>https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1374
  • Inouye, K. and Mills, D. (2021), Fear of the academic fake? Journal editorials and the amplification of the ‘predatory publishing’ discourse. Learned Publishing, 34: 396-406. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1377

^ back to top

Library Publishing Coalition 

  • Ethical Framework for Library Publishing
    Library publishing is distinguished in part from other types of scholarly publishing by a focus on adherence to the values and ethics of librarianship. An Ethical Framework for Library Publishing supports good practice in this area by providing resources and guidance in a number of ethical areas of importance to library publishers. Version 1.0 (published July 2018) covers publishing practice; accessibility; diversity, equity, and inclusion; privacy and analytics; and academic and intellectual freedom.

^ back to top

Paths in Publishing

^ back to top

Society for Scholarly Publishing

^ back to top