IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/maorev/v7y2011i03p397-406_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

RETRACTED - Ethics and Integrity in the Publishing Process: Myths, Facts, and a Roadmap

Author

Listed:
  • Schminke, Marshall
  • Ambrose, Maureen L.

Abstract

Integrity provides the foundation for most scholarly endeavours, including research and publishing. Authors, reviewers, and editors share responsibility for creating and maintaining the system in which we conduct and publish our work. However, research and publishing are complicated processes. A single research effort may involve multiple authors, hundreds of participants, and a variety of skills and tools that play out over the course of months or even years. Ethical challenges may arise at any point along the way, so it is not surprising that both new and experienced scholars often struggle to understand and maintain the ethical standards expected of them. This article highlights some of the main challenges scholars face and provides initial guidance for seeking solutions. But most importantly, it sets the stage for this Special Editors' Forum on research and publishing ethics.

Suggested Citation

  • Schminke, Marshall & Ambrose, Maureen L., 2011. "RETRACTED - Ethics and Integrity in the Publishing Process: Myths, Facts, and a Roadmap," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 397-406, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:maorev:v:7:y:2011:i:03:p:397-406_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1740877600002564/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hopp, Christian & Hoover, Gary A., 2017. "How prevalent is academic misconduct in management research?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 73-81.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:maorev:v:7:y:2011:i:03:p:397-406_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/mor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.