create new tag
, view all tags, tagging instructions
Return to Browse by

Return to RCR Case Studies

Please Comment on the Teaching Quality of the CASE


Please rate the graphic:

  • 5 stars = highest rating
  • 1 star = lowest rating
  • SCORE = average of all votes
Graph Rating
Score: 0, My vote: 0, Total votes: 0

EthicsCaseStudyForm edit

Title UAB Peer Review2
Long Title

Contributor/Contact Dale J. Benos, PhD (benos@physiology@uab.edu)
Contributor Details Dale J. Benos, PhD
Endowed Professor of Physiology and Biophysics
Chairman of the Department of Physiology and Biophysics
The University of Alabama at Birmingham

CTSA Alabama
Case Study Provided A paper was submitted to your journal. The review process was quite extensive, the paper having undergone several rounds of peer review. Part of the delay was caused by the authors not revising the paper in a timely fashion. The paper was also delayed by one of the reviewers, in that, very demanding revisions were required. After the paper was resubmitted a third time, the corresponding author wrote to the editor stating that she saw a similar paper that was just published on the web within the last week. The author asked a very specific question, "I have been wondering whether anyone in the [authorship] in the recently published paper was acting as a reviewer of our paper? Of course, that would raise an ethical issue because of the quite obvious conflict of interest. Although I do not pretend to know the identity of the referees, I feel justified to seek an answer to this question." On examination, the editor discovers that yes; indeed, one of the authors of the previously published paper was one of the three reviewers of the manuscript in question. Moreover, it was the same reviewer who demanded extensive revisions. What should be done?
Data Acquisition, Management, Sharing and Ownership Topics No Data acquisition_management_sharing and ownership Topics
Mentor and Trainee Responsibilities Topics No mentor and trainee responsibilities topics
Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship Topics
The significance of authorship,
Poor publication practices,
Protecting privacy in publication
Peer Review Topics
The significance of peer review,
Conflicts of interest and peer reviews,
Qualities of a good review and reviewer,
Logistics of peer reviewing,
Responding to reviewers,
Reviewer roles in ensuring RCR,
Editorial responsibilities
Collaborative Science Topics No collaborative science topics
Research Misconduct Topics No research misconduct topics
Conflicts of Interest, Law and Policy Topics No conflicts of interest_law_and policy topics
Human Subjects

Citation Benos DJ, Fabres J, Famer J, Gutierrez JP, Hennessy K, Kosek D, Lee JH, Olteanu D, Russell T, Shaikh F, and Wang K. Ethics and scientific publication. Advances in Physiology Education 29: 59-74, 2006. [Online]
URL http://advan.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/29/2/59
RCR Keyword Peer Review, Manuscript, Editor, Reviewer, Conflict of Interest, Delaying the Review Process
Other RCR Keywords

Case Difficulty Quick
Type of Case

Source for Topic Areas Du Bois, J., & Dueker, J. (2009). Teaching and Assessing the Responsible Conduct of Research: A Delphi Consensus Panel Report. Journal of Research Administration, 40(1), 49-70.


Topic revision: r6 - 13 Nov 2011 - 12:28:29 - MarkYarborough
Copyright & by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding CTSPedia? Send feedback