Reviewer bias or competitive harmful acts by reviewers

How it works

To find out if a case, or suspected case of ethics abuse, falls within the category of this tree, please consult the definitions provided under 'What identifies a case in this area?' If it does, the recommended action of this tree can be followed. This tree furthermore provides:

  • Case studies.
  • References to the relevant form letters (examples of appropriate letters for various situations).
  • Flow charts from COPE, here named 'COPE charts'. These 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.
  • References to relevant Elsevier policies/links.



What identifies a case in this area?
Recommended action


Case studies
1: Submission of a paper by a reviewer
2: Reviewer/author conflict of interest
3: Referee with a conflict of interest

COPE charts

NOTE
What to do if you suspect a reviewer has appropriated an author's ideas or data?

Relevant Elsevier policies/links

Duties of reviewers
Elsevier policy on article withdrawal