Events, By Category and Date:
» Go to news mainEditorial Misconduct
Baylis, F., Cattapan, A., & Snow, D. (2017). . Public Affairs Quarterly, 31(2), 143-155.
听
Abstract
This article interrogates the nature of editorial privilege and authorial integrity in peer-reviewed academic journals. Focusing on the authors' experience with publishing a letter critiquing high-profile authors in a high-profile journal, the article identifies key concerns with (i) the time it took to complete the peer-review process, (ii) the failure to provide the authors with the peer-review reports, and (iii) the decision to rewrite our text instead of allowing us to respond to the peer-review comments. Our experience suggests that despite the existence of editorial codes of conduct, encroachments on authorial听 integrity still occur, and the lines between helpful copyediting and unhelpful rewriting of an article are not always clear.
Recent News
- On what basis did Health Canada approve OxyContin in 1996? A retrospective analysis of regulatory data
- Matthew Herder Resigns from Patented Medicine Prices Review Board
- Permissive regulation: A critical review of the regulatory history of buprenorphine formulations in Canada
- Fair pricing of 鈥渙ld鈥 orphan drugs: considerations for Canada鈥檚 orphan drug policy
- Podcast or Perish: Episode 040: Fran莽oise Baylis
- Bioethicist Fran莽oise Baylis asks why humans think 'they can just take everything'
- Killam Prize winners discuss research in Canada
- World鈥憆enowned 黄色直播 bioethicist and battery pioneer win prestigious Killam Prize