Policies at Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing
Ethical standards in our publishing
Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards, including taking account of the benchmark ethical standards and guidelines set out by the two following bodies (who have defined best practice in this area):
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
Committee on Publishing Ethics (COPE)
These standards relate to issues such as:
Setting out clear guidelines and establishing systems for ensuring material is written to the highest standards of accuracy and integrity (e.g. by setting out contractual requirements relating to plagiarism (backed up by use of the iThenticate service) and respect for copyright, and requiring supporting references for key statements that can then be authenticated by CrossRef and checked by readers)
Ensuring objective and unbiased peer review (with reviews tracked using ScholarOne)
Ensuring that all authors and (where they wish) reviewers are appropriately identified and acknowledged for their contributions in published material
Setting out clear guidelines and requirements (including appropriate wording in contributor contracts) relating to declaration of potential conflicts of interest
Ensuring diversity and inclusion (e.g. in selecting editors and authors purely on the basis of academic merit)
Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing welcomes any comments on or suggestions for improving its ethical standards and processes. For more information contact: info@bdspublishing.com
Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies in preparing chapters
Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing accepts the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies for tasks such as data analysis which can then contribute to the findings reported in chapters. However, if they are used at any point in the process of writing chapters, AI-assisted technologies should only be used to improve presentation (e.g. language and readability). In part because they may be based on highly unreliable (and typically unidentifiable) sources, and in part because AI algorithms may not be designed to adequately assess the quality of published research, AI-assisted technologies (such as ChatGPT) should not be used to generate the main text of the chapter e.g. to summarise or assess published research, to produce summaries or draw conclusions. The author remains entirely responsible for the content and quality of a chapter. As set out in our contributor contracts, authors are required to inform the Publisher of any use of AI-assisted technologies in preparing chapters. The Publishers may then require additional peer review if they have any concerns about the effects of using such technologies on the quality and reliability of the text, decline to publish the chapter if they can demonstrate a negative effect on quality, as well as require the author to include a statement in the chapter for the benefit of readers about the use of AI-assisted technologies in preparing the text.