01701nas a2200229   4500000000100000000000100001008004100002260001500043653000900058653001100067653002400078653001100102100002000113700002900133700002000162245009400182856004600276300001200322490000700334520111600341022001401457       2008                            d  c2008-09-0110abias10aethics10aJournal peer review10aReform1 aDavid B. Resnik1 aChristina Gutierrez-Ford1 aShyamal Peddada00aPerceptions of Ethical Problems with Scientific Journal Peer Review: An Exploratory Study  uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-008-9059-4  a305-3100 v143 aThis article reports the results of an anonymous survey of researchers at a government research institution concerning their perceptions about ethical problems with journal peer review. Incompetent review was the most common ethical problem reported by the respondents, with 61.8% (SE = 3.3%) claiming to have experienced this at some point during peer review. Bias (50.5%, SE = 3.4%) was the next most common problem. About 22.7% (SE = 2.8%) of respondents said that a reviewer had required them to include unnecessary references to his/her publication(s), 17.7% (SE = 2.6%) said that comments from reviewers had included personal attacks, and 9.6% (SE = 2.0%) stated that reviewers had delayed publication to publish a paper on the same topic. Two of the most serious violations of peer review ethics, breach of confidentiality (6.8%, SE = 1.7%) and using ideas, data, or methods without permission (5%, SE = 1.5%) were perceived less often than the other problems. We recommend that other investigators follow up on our exploratory research with additional studies on the ethics of peer review.  a1471-5546