<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="6.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><rec-number>8169</rec-number><ref-type>Journal Article</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Wager, E.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Fiack, S.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Graf, C.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Robinson, A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rowlands, I.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Science journal editors' views on publication ethics: results of an international survey</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Medical Ethics</style></secondary-title><short-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Science journal editors' views on publication ethics: results of an international survey</style></short-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Authorship</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">LITERARY</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">MEDICINE</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PERIODICAL</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">plagiarism</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PUBLICATIONS</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SCIENCE</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SURVEYS</style></keyword></keywords><taxonomies><taxonomy><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Plagiarism</style></taxonomy><taxonomy><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Authorship</style></taxonomy><taxonomy><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Science </style></taxonomy><taxonomy><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Medicine</style></taxonomy></taxonomies><pubtype><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal Article</style></pubtype><audience-level><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ug</style></audience-level><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://ezproxy.gl.iit.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=43605052&site=ehost-live</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">35</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">348-353</style></pages><issn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">03066800</style></issn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Breaches of publication ethics such as plagiarism, data fabrication and redundant publication are recognised as forms of research misconduct that can undermine the scientific literature. This article reports on a survey of journal editors to determine their views about a range of publication ethics issues. The authors found that  the general level of concern about the 16 ethical issues identified in the questionnaire sent to editors was low, with mean severity scores of &lt;1 (on a scale of 0-3) for all but one. The issue of greatest concern (mean score 1.19) was redundant publication. Most editors felt confident in handling the issues, with &lt;15% feeling &quot;not at all confident&quot; for all but one of the issues (gift authorship, 22% not confident). Most editors believed such problems occurred less than once a year and &gt;20% of the editors stated that 12 of the 16 items never occurred at their journal. However, 13%-47% did not know the frequency of the problems. Awareness and use of guidelines was generally low. Most editors were unaware of all except other journals' instructions. Conclusions: Most editors of science journals seem not very concerned about publication ethics and believe that misconduct occurs only rarely in their journals. Many editors are unfamiliar with available guidelines but would welcome more guidance or training. </style></abstract><doi><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10.1136/jme.2008.028324</style></doi><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Article</style></work-type><accession-num><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">43605052</style></accession-num><notes><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Wager, E. 1; Email Address: liz@sideview.demon.co.uk Fiack, S. 2 Graf, C. 3 Robinson, A. 3 Rowlands, I. 4; Affiliation: 1: Sideview, Princes Risborough, UK 2: Wiley-Blackwell, Berlin, Germany 3: Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK 4: UCL Centre for Publishing, University College London, London, UK; Source Info: Jun2009, Vol. 35 Issue 6, p348; Subject Term: PERIODICAL editors; Subject Term: PUBLICATIONS; Subject Term: SURVEYS; Subject Term: LITERARY ethics; Subject Term: PLAGIARISM; Number of Pages: 6p; Illustrations: 4 Charts; Document Type: Article</style></notes></record></records></xml>