Scientific publishing is one of the crucial means of communication in science. Abiding by the principles of etiquette and good publishing practice is essential for ensuring the quality and integrity of scientific work and contributes to shaping the image of the scientist and the university as a whole.
We recommend that authors use so-called author's identifiers to reliably assign publications and other results of scientific research. Unique and permanent identifiers will enable reliable identification of the author even in the case of various forms of registration, agreement or change of name, various forms of affiliations and possible errors. Masaryk University strongly recommends that researchers establish the ORCID or ResearcherID. Once created, enter your identifier into the IS and keep your profile up to date. The ORCID and ResearcherID identifiers can be interconnected to pass on publication information, so there is no need to fill in each profile individually. The issue of permanent identifiers at MU is regulated by MU Instruction No. 1/2021.
ORCID (Open Researcher & Contributor ID) is a persistent digital researcher identifier provided free of charge by the non-profit organization ORCID. Registration and creation of an identifier are possible on the ORCID website (instructions here).
ResearcherID is a unique identifier for scientists provided by Clarivate Analytics, available on the Publons platform. The identifier is connected to the Web of Science database - after pairing publications from WoS, the author can monitor other indicators (h-index, citations, etc.). The identifier can be assigned to authors with at least one publication on the Web of Science. Registration in Publons is required to be assigned a ResearcherID (instructions here).
Good Practice in Scientific Publishing
|GOOD WAY||WRONG WAY|
|Authorship||I follow the principles of ethics of scientific publishing.||I attribute co-authors who did not contribute significantly to the creation of the work or do not meet the definition of authorship.|
|I respect the rules of the field.||I artificially increase my publishing output.|
|As an author, I have made a significant intellectual contribution to the creation of the work and meet the definition of authorship.||I do not properly cite; I commit plagiarism.|
|I properly reference sources.||I do not use scholarly identifiers or keep my profiles up to date.|
|I will familiarize myself with the final version of the article.|
|When I discover an error in my publication, I take appropriate action (issuing an erratum, retraction, ...).|
|I use persistent digital identifiers for authors (ORCID, ResearcherID).|
|Affiliation||My affiliations reflect the actual contribution of the institution to the result.||I give the affiliation of an institution in relation to which the result did not originate.|
|I provide affiliations in the correct format.||I provide non-standard forms of affiliations.|
|Research Data||I create and keep up to date a Data Management Plan (DMP).||I do not plan how I will handle my research data.|
|I use an appropriate tool for the DMP.||I do not store data and metadata in a way that guarantees their integrity.|
|I store the data in a suitable and secure repository.||I falsify results and deliberately misrepresent or fabricate data.|
|I archive data properly.|
|I strive to meet the FAIR data principles.|
|Publication Strategy||I only publish original and high-quality research.||I overproduce publications of lower quality.|
|I pay attention to the choice of the journal (subject classification, trustworthy publisher, transparent publication practices of the journal, ...).||I artificially increase my citation impact (citation networks, excessive self-citation).|
I make sure that the journal states:
I alert when the journal:
truthful information of editorial board members,
refers to non-existent members of the editorial board,
detailed information on peer review, retraction, etc..,
|has an unusually fast peer review process, or I find that the peer review process is not standard or does not take place at all,|
|information on author fees,||publishes apparently poor-quality articles,|
|gives true information about metrics.||gives false information about metrics,|
|gives false information about indexing in databases,|
|Also:||publishes an enormous number of Special Issues,|
|I use the service of KUK to check the journal.||presents unusual metrics,|
|Evaluation scorecard of journals for the KUK service.||sends me a lot of junk mail.|
The so-called predatory journals abuse the principle of publishing in the Open Access mode for their own enrichment using questionable or fraudulent practices. The primary goal of these magazines/publishers is to collect royalties regardless of the quality of the published results. Typical features of these journals include, for example, very short or fictitious review proceedings, false information about members of the editorial board, incomplete data on royalties, reference to questionable metrics, frequent sending of spam, etc.
Publishing in these journals significantly reduces the credibility of the author and the entire institution. We, therefore, recommend that you carefully consider in which journals the author will publish. Tips on how to recognize these predators can be found here.
Authors from the campus workplaces can use the University Campus Library service to verify compliance with the principles of transparency and good practice of scientific journals.
Strengthening the Prevention of Plagiarism in Student Works - handbooks
Handbook for Academic Staff
How to Prevent Plagiarism in Student Work
All outputs and information about the projects Strengthening the Prevention of Plagiarism in Student Works project and Strengthening the Academic Integrity of University Students with a Focus on the Risks and Opportunities of Distance Learning and Assessment Methods can be found at www.akademickaetika.cz/en/