[AISWorld] Follow-up to AIS Insider: Plagiarism: Your Input Sought

[Robert Davison]

Dear AIS Members,

In recent months, a number of cases of suspected or alleged plagiarism, double submission of papers and other ethical issues, have been brought to the attention of the AIS Research Ethics Committee. As a result of investigating these cases, the committee has proposed that a more standardised set of sanctions should be developed for these situations. We sent our initial set of suggestions to the AIS Council which debated them at their most recent meeting. Council is broadly supportive of the proposed actions, but also suggested that we solicit feedback from the AIS membership – hence this email. For ease of reference, we colour coded the actions to be taken for a variety of different circumstances. We invite you to comment on the proposed actions indicated below. We anticipate that if approved, these actions would be included in the AIS bylaws and will be communicated to all authors who submit to AIS conferences/journals as part of the submission process, i.e. where authors confirm that they have not violated any of the principles of the AIS Code of Research Conduct.

Yours sincerely
Robert Davison – Chair, AIS Research Ethics Committee
Kalle Lyytinen, Robert Nickerson – Members of the AIS Research Ethics Committee

Blue: No action taken

The breach is unintentional and minor. Examples could include:
•	submitting a paper without informing the journal/conference that it has been published elsewhere in a workshop, seminar or other venue not protected by copyright;
•	poor referencing (but not actual plagiarism).
The authors admit the breach and apologize for the breach.

Green: A warning letter is sent to the authors and the editors of AIS publications are informed.

The breach is intentional but less significant. Examples could include: 
•	unintentional double submission of a paper (e.g. by two or more authors of the same paper to two different venues);
•	not communicating the fact that the manuscript has already been presented and published elsewhere; 
•	minor self-plagiarism. 
The authors admit the breach and apologize for the breach.

Purple: Some level of disciplinary action which includes informing editors and withdrawing the right to submit to AIS conferences and journals for 2-3 years depending on the level of violation

The breach here is significant and intentional. Examples include:

•	Intentional double submission of a manuscript to a conference and attempting to hide this fact. 
•	Significant levels of plagiarism (intentional or not). 

The authors do not recognize, admit or apologize for the breach. The authors deny that they have violated AIS Research Ethics Regulations.

Red: Serious breach including a letter to the department head, exclusion for large number of years from submissions to AIS publications and withdrawing all member rights or expulsion from AIS.

•	Repeated double-submission of manuscripts to AIS publications. 
•	Substantial, repeated and or deliberate plagiarism or misrepresentation of others’ work. 

The authors do not recognize, admit or apologize for the breach. The authors deny that they have violated AIS Research Ethics Regulations.