Journal X faced a challenging situation involving an authorship dispute that unfolded after the acceptance of two manuscripts submitted by author A. The corresponding author, without agreement from the last author, removed their name from both manuscripts during the proofing stage. Subsequently, author A requested the removal of author B, providing a detailed account of a personal dispute between them. The editors of Journal X, after ascertaining that no agreement had been sought from author B, decided to reinstate the original author listing.
However, the complexity deepened when the publisher received communication from author B, expressing concerns about potential removal from three manuscripts, where he was the senior author and author A was a researcher in his laboratory. Investigation revealed that one of the manuscripts had been rejected by Journal X but was later submitted and tracked to Journal Y, which also used the same publisher. Author B had already been removed from that manuscript. Notably, the host institution was embroiled in internal conflicts.
COPE advised that while the authors' behavior was improper, the decision made by the editor lacked appropriate evidence. The funders of the research should be contacted, and further investigation was warranted. Despite the challenges within the host institutions, they should be informed, with a copy sent to a higher authority.
In response to COPE's guidance, the editors of Journal X embarked on a more thorough investigation, reaching out to the funders of the research and informing the troubled institutions. The editors also decided to reject all future submissions from both authors A and B, reflecting a commitment to upholding ethical standards and addressing authorship disputes with transparency and diligence.