Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T21:19:49.985Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Authors are not criminals and editors should not be policemen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2011

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Authors are a necessary and most appreciated basis for the publishing of any scientific journal. They should be welcomed for their creativity, originality and productivity, not stigmatized in general as cheaters and criminals because a very few were tempted beyond their control to cut the slices a bit too thin, overdo the utilization of leftover data, listed too many authors to a paper, forgot to report a harmless study to an ethical committee, or in very few cases commit severe actions of fraud.

The managerial way of thinking, meeting every author with systems of control and limitations is like poison to creative minds. Instead of appointing editors as policemen, we may preferably meet the vast majority of classical scholarly working scientists with trust, confidence and support, facilitating the process of disseminating the results from their creative minds – and of course consequently show the deliberately cheating researchers the door when they act unfaithfully to the scientific society.

Type
Editorials
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

References

REFERENCES

Munk-Jørgensen, P. (2003). The privilege of editing a scientific journal. Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale 12, 1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munk-Jørgensen, P., Christiansen, B. & Licht, R.W. (2009). Can't lead from behind – Happy New Year 2009. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 119, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munk-Jørgensen, P., Christiansen, B. & Licht, R.W. (2010). Your paper has been accepted for publication. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 121, 13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed