Annette, here is a quick reply: As others have mentioned this is done quite frequently. Unfortunately, it is often done without any reference as to the specific relationship between the later paper and the previously published paper and this where the practice becomes unethical. This is called salami publication (AKA piecemeal publication, segmentation, etc.). The practice is completely ethical as long as you state clearly and unambiguously how the data you are reporting are derived from the ToP study.
Whether you can simply refer to the ToP article for details about the method section will depend on the preference of the journal editor and, for example, how much of the audience the journal you are targeting has in common with ToP. The other big question is whether you can simply copy word-for-word your method section and reuse it in the new article, a practice that some authors use and abuse. I can tell you that many editors dislike this type of substantial text reuse and, in fact, there is at least one editorial that cautions against simply reusing methods sections as some authors end up doing. I always caution against using such a strategy because it sort of suggests lazy scholarship and assumes, often incorrectly, that the previously written method section cannot possibly benefit from additional clarification/elaboration (I make the latter point in a soon-to-be published letter to Science). I would also suggest that when you send the manuscript you should explain, in the accompanying letter to the editor, the reason for the study's segmentation. I hope the above helps. Miguel ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 6:19:35 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [tips] ethics question This is a question related to self-plagiarism. I hope Miguel is reading this! A collegue and I recently had a study published in ToP. In preparing that ms the editors wanted us to cut down the length of the article so we eliminated a research question completely. Now we want to publish that research question, and the answer to it; so we are using the same data set but analyzing it in terms of an additional variable that did not appear in the ToP article. At what point does using the same data set constitute a breach of ethics? Is it OK to reuse that data set for another, independent publication? And in that case, how much can we just refer a reader to the ToP article in terms of methodological details? Do we repeat all the methods information or do we refer back to the first article? Do people publish this way and how would you know? My colleague searched and searched the literature to see what others have done. If others have used the same data set for two publications, then they certainly did not explictly state that. Shouldn't one normally, however, state this explicitly? Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 619-260-4006 [email protected] --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
