Situation
Professor Martin is coming up for tenure and is concerned that he may not be perceived as having enough publications. He recently published an article based on original data that includes his unique and effective index for predicting criminal behavior in adolescence. Professor Jones, a criminologists and senior member in the department, is so impressed by this work that he asks Professor Martin to contribute to an edited volume on juvenile delinquency which he is currently editing. Upon receiving the manuscript, he notices how strikingly similar it is to the published journal article. It has a different title and minor stylistic changes but essentially presents the original analyses of the data with some small changes but which change (and challenge) the original findings. Professor Jones also notices that there is no acknowledgment to the prior piece.
Questions
- What are Professor Jones’ responsibilities in this case? to Professor Martin as one of his senior colleagues? to the edited volume? to the Department as a member of the voting faculty on Martin’s tenure case?
- What if Jones was an editor of a “magazine” which translates technical academic articles into interesting pieces for the educated public?
- What if there were no conflicting findings? How would that change the scenario?
Discussion
According to the Code, sociologists should not publish previously published material as original unless they are accompanied by proper acknowledgment. This takes precedence over Martin’s concerns about tenure. Jones is required by the Code to bring this to the Martin’s attention and informally resolve the problem. If Martin refuses, Jones should reject the article outright despite the potential contribution of the paper to the edited volume. If it appears elsewhere, he has an obligation to note this problem in future tenure reviews. These problems do not apply if the expressed intent of the more “popular” journal is to bring sociologists research to the public; however, the previous work must be cited.
