Allegations of Misconduct at Brieflands STM Publisher
Brieflands is vigilant about potential misconduct in research and publications. As members of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), all Brieflands journals adhere to the COPE guidelines for handling cases of suspected misconduct. Each Brieflands journal features its specific COPE logo on its website, which redirects readers to the journal webpage on the COPE website. You can find the direct link to COPE on each journal's "journal info" or "List of Source" page.
Every Editor-in-Chief (EIC) at Brieflands has the capacity to seek advice from COPE. As a publisher, we commit to providing any requested data to authorized institutions or organizations like COPE.
Reporting a Suspicious Case
There are two methods to report misconduct (pre- or post-publication) to us:
- Submit a ticket via Publisher Support at Support.
- Post a comment on the article page (Post Publication Peer Review). The comment will be managed by the editor.
Addressing Direct Concerns Raised by Whistleblowers
We value whistleblowers among our readers and ensure the confidentiality of their information in all circumstances.
When handling cases brought forward by whistleblowers who directly contact the editor or publisher with concerns about a published article, it's crucial to follow structured guidelines. According to COPE's guideline, available as a detailed flowchart, these concerns may range from questions of scientific soundness to serious allegations like plagiarism, figure manipulation, or other misconduct, whether the whistleblower chooses to remain anonymous or not.
Submitting a ticket through our Support portal creates a written document that initiates the investigation process. It's also essential to respect the whistleblower's preference for anonymity throughout the process.
How to respond a concern raised by whistleblowers via social media
In today's digital age, discussions about scientific research and the integrity of published articles often extend beyond traditional platforms to social media and post-publication peer review sites. These discussions can include both anonymous and non-anonymous critiques concerning the scientific soundness of an article, or allegations of plagiarism, figure manipulation, and other forms of misconduct.
In alignment with COPE's guidelines, we have established protocols for responding to such concerns effectively:
Respect for Anonymity:
We prioritize the preference of whistleblowers for anonymity, ensuring that their identities are protected throughout the investigation process.
Moving the Discussion:
To maintain the integrity of the discourse and protect all parties involved, we aim to transition discussions from the public domain to a more controlled, private environment where issues can be addressed thoroughly and respectfully.
Public Acknowledgment:
When concerns are raised via social media, we respond publicly on the same platform to express our gratitude for the feedback and encourage the individual to raise a formal complaint through a designated contact point, such as our customer services. This ensures that the complaint is directed to the appropriate person for a detailed investigation.
Official Channel for Responses:
To address these concerns, responses are made from our publisher account, adhering to legal and ethical standards.
Communication of Outcomes:
Following the conclusion of our investigation, should there be any outcomes such as corrections or retractions, we consider sharing this information on the same social media sites or platforms where the initial concerns were voiced.
Ethics Committees at Brieflands
All concerns and claims will be recorded electronically in our ticketing system and reviewed by our support team staff. Based on the nature of the problem, it will be communicated to all relevant parties and discussed in the first weekly meeting of the Primary Ethical Committee. This committee is located at the publisher and includes the journal owner, the editor-in-chief, and a publisher representative. High-priority concerns will be primarily screened and handled by the publisher's CEO.
After collecting all necessary documents and interviewing all involved parties, the publisher will communicate the preliminary decision to all authors. Final defense and documents, along with other essential written documents, will be sent to the Secondary Ethical Committee, which includes members of the preparatory committee and the Brieflands advisory and trustee board.
In case of proven research or publication misconduct, we follow the COPE flowcharts, which prescribe various actions from publishing a correction to withdrawing or retracting the article or even replacing a responsible journal staff like the editor-in-chief. Please refer to our policies about the mentioned rules.