Misconduct, Marginality and Editorial Practices in Management, Business and Economics Journals

Area of Science:

• Management, Business, and Economics (MBE) journals
• Scholarly publishing ethics
• Research integrity

Background:

• Misconduct and marginality pose significant challenges to the integrity of management, business, and economics (MBE) journals.
• Previous research has not fully addressed the prevalence and editorial practices concerning these issues within MBE publications.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the extent of misconduct and marginality in MBE journals.
• To examine current editorial practices and perceptions related to combating these issues.
• To gather insights on potential strategies for supporting legitimate scholarly contributions.

Main Methods:

• Data collection involved three phases: identifying retractions, surveying editors of retracted papers, and surveying active MBE journals.
• Utilized keyword searches across seven major databases to identify retracted papers (n=1329 journals).
• Administered surveys to editors (n=64, 28% response rate) and active journals (n=937, 31.8% response rate), employing frequency, cross-tabulation, and qualitative analyses.

Main Results:

• 184 retracted papers were identified between 2005-2015, with a tenfold increase from 2005-2007 to 2012-2015.
• Suspected misconduct cases strain editorial workload; 42% of surveyed journals use screening software for submissions.
• A majority of journals recognize marginality (salami-style submissions), with varied detection methods and a need for strategies to support creative work.

Conclusions:

• Retractions in MBE journals have significantly increased, highlighting a growing concern for research integrity.
• Journals are actively implementing measures like screening software to combat misconduct and marginality.
• There is a recognized need for developing supportive editorial approaches to foster genuine scholarly contributions while mitigating problematic practices.