All decision trees
Decision trees provide flow charts for dealing with different forms of publishing ethics abuse. When an editor is confronted with a case (or suspected case) of ethics abuse, he/she should first identify the type of unethical behaviour, using the definitions provided in each of the decision trees. Then the decision trees, and their recommended action, can be followed. Flow charts from COPE, in this kit named ‘COPE charts’, are available for a second opinion. This is often the time for the editor to discuss the case with his/her publishing contact within Elsevier and agree what action, if any, needs to be taken. Within the decision trees, reference is made to the relevant form letters and Elsevier policies.
Types of decision trees
General guidelines (all decision trees)
1. Authorship complaints
2. Plagiarism complaints
3. Multiple, duplicate, concurrent publication/Simultaneous submission
4. Research results misappropriation
5. Allegations of research errors and fraud
6. Research standards violations
7. Undisclosed conflicts of interest
8. Reviewer bias or competitive harmful acts by reviewers
