Gather information: who is making the complaint or raising the issue and who should then become involved?

• External Editor and internal publishing editor should always coordinate
• If complaints come into Elsevier through any source other than the publishing editor, the publishing editor should be contacted immediately

Ultimately, who is the decision-maker regarding how to resolve and handle the complaint?

• External journal Editor (or society-owner for society journal)
  - as to the merits of the claim (plagiarism, scientific procedures, context of dispute, prior reported research, background of parties)
  - possibly in conjunction with other co-Editors, members of editorial board or society, peer reviewers, experts in the field selected by Editor
  - possibly in conjunction with the 'other journal' Editor or publisher (especially for multiple publication issues)

• Elsevier may need to be involved to help document the dispute and its resolution and to provide specialist support from time to time
  - Use the procedures outlined in this document
  - Professional judgment of publishing editor or publishing director about what ‘best practices’ are with respect to the complaint made and its resolution
  - Professional advice of one kind or another (obtain external expert? legal adviser?)

When is an ethics complaint a "legal" matter that requires Elsevier legal review/support?

• The “obvious” times:
  - Formal legal complaint or brief filed in court
  - Letter from attorney representing an "aggrieved" party
  - A complaint is made about the infringement of a legal right such as copyright, moral rights, or a right of privacy
  
• The less obvious times:
  - Plausible (from a scientific perspective) conflicting claims from several parties which cannot be resolved by the Editor through the methods and procedures outlined herein (suggesting that significant factual investigation will be required)
  - Where comment is made in a notice, expression of concern, corrigendum, or retraction that might be considered defamatory (this is automatically reviewed in the case of retractions)
  

Documenting the complaint/dispute

• The publishing editor should always help the Editor to record and document claim
  - Prepare ‘incident report’ with all factual questions (who, what, when, where, why) dealt with
  - For plagiarism and duplicate publication issues, obtain the respective texts/articles
  

Due process for our authors

• When the complaint is made against our author, general rule will be that the journal Editor should contact the author about whom a complaint has been made, and the author be given the opportunity to respond/comment
  - Editor may decide on basis of author response (if author is responsive, articulates clear and convincing position - and the Editor may draw inferences from the opposite as well)

Consider whether there are other bodies or agents that could or should be involved (if after some degree of investigation, there seems to be some merit in complaint and the complaint seems one that would be more easily (and reasonably) investigated and solved by that other institution)