Editorial: Ethical authorship

Nick Rushby;

doi:10.26907/esd12.2.01

Ethical Guidelines for Publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle Clinical Reports

JCSM Clinical Reports ◽

10.17987/jcsm-cr.v1i1.28 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Stephan Von Haehling ◽

Nicole Ebner ◽

John E Morley ◽

Andrew JS Coats ◽

Stefan D Anker

Keyword(s):

Conflicts Of Interest ◽

Research Work ◽

Ethics Committees ◽

Institutional Review Boards ◽

Original Research ◽

Ethical Guidelines ◽

Abstract Form ◽

Institutional Review ◽

Ethical Authorship ◽

Available Information

AbstractThis article details the principles of ethical authorship and publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle Clinical Reports (JCSM Clinical Reports). At the time of submission to JCSM Clinical Reports, the corresponding author, on behalf of all co-authors, needs to certify adherence to these principles. The principles are obtained below: All authors listed on a manuscript considered for publication have approved its submission and (if accepted) publication as provided to JCSM Clinical Reports;No person having a right to be recognized as author has been omitted from the list of authors on the submitted manuscript;The submitted work is original and is neither under consideration elsewhere nor has it been published previously in whole or in part other than in abstract form;All authors certify that the work is original and does not contain excessive overlap with prior or contemporaneous publication elsewhere, and where the publication reports on cohorts, trials, or data that have been reported on before these other publications must be referenced;All original research work are approved by the relevant bodies such as institutional review boards or ethics committees;All conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, that may affect the authors' ability to present data objectively, and relevant sources of funding have been duly declared in the manuscript;The manuscript in its published form will be maintained on the servers of JCSM Clinical Reports as a valid publication only as long as all statements in the guidelines on ethical publishing remain true; andIf any of the aforementioned statements ceases to be true, the authors have a duty to notify the Editors of JCSM Clinical Reports as soon as possible so that the available information regarding the published article can be updated and/or the manuscript can be withdrawn.

Download Full-text

Social-cognitive barriers to ethical authorship

Frontiers in Psychology ◽

10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00877 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 6 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Jordan R. Schoenherr

Keyword(s):

Social Cognitive ◽

Ethical Authorship

Download Full-text

Knowledge on Ethical Authorship: A Comparative Study Between Medical And Pharmacy Faculty

Journal of Young Pharmacists ◽

10.5530/jyp.2016.2.15 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 136-140 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kusal Kanti Das ◽

Tejaswini Vallabha ◽

Sumangala Mahesh Patil ◽

Jaydeb Ray ◽

Kishore Kumar Deepak

Keyword(s):

Comparative Study ◽

Ethical Authorship

Download Full-text

Pariah Modernism

Gertrude Stein and the Making of Jewish Modernism ◽

10.5744/florida/9780813066318.003.0005 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 87-122

Author(s):

Amy Feinstein

Keyword(s):

The Novel ◽

Anglo Saxon ◽

Avant Garde ◽

Character Study ◽

Ethical Authorship ◽

Modern Era ◽

Final Text ◽

Indefinite Pronouns ◽

Character Types

Chapter 4 considers the solely-metaphorical presence of Jews in the final text of The Making of Americans. Paralleling the evolution found in Stein’s notebooks, the novel’s narrator largely abandons storytelling in lieu of character study. Stein replaces the Jewish and Anglo-Saxon character types from the notebooks with a purely behavioral nomenclature and, as a result, the published volume contains no explicit references to Jews. The narrator nonetheless maintains a focus on a categorically Jewish and modern type: the pariah. He introduces several pariah figures, from servant girls and parvenus to avant-garde writers, who join him in a fraternity of what he calls “Brother Singulars.” With an eye to Hannah Arendt’s notion of the modern Jewish visionary or “conscious pariah,” the chapter argues that Stein’s narrator, with the characterological “plot” he is writing for himself and strangers, estranges narration by increasingly abstracting his characterology with indefinite pronouns as the novel progresses. Amidst the formal experimentation of ever-increasing repetition and abstraction, the narrator’s Jewish pariahs recede into textual indistinguishability while still differentiating themselves from others. Through this association, Stein sets the agenda for ethical authorship in the modern era.

Download Full-text

Responsibility in Academic Writing: A Dialogue of the Dead

Qualitative Inquiry ◽

10.1177/1077800417734008 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 24 (9) ◽

pp. 704-711 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Chris Smissaert ◽

Kari Jalonen

Keyword(s):

Moral Responsibility ◽

Academic Writing ◽

Mikhail Bakhtin ◽

Theoretical Principle ◽

The Dead ◽

Ethical Authorship ◽

Aesthetic Ideal

Drawing on the notion of answerability introduced by Mikhail Bakhtin, this article inquires into our moral responsibility as academic writers to others for what and how we write. According to Bakhtin, it is a difficult task to be answerable from one’s unique place in being and it is tempting to seek some sort of alibi, be it a theoretical principle, an aesthetic ideal, or a larger whole, and to play the roles therein. To break away from these domains, in search of some sort of ethical authorship, we engage in a Menippean dialogue. Exploring responsibility in such a satirical dialogue creates an awareness of the roles we easily hide behind, draws attention to what these roles might do to our writing, and enables us to try out other roles as we allow ourselves to not be so deadly serious in our writing.

Download Full-text