Ethics and Plagiarism Update

As the world’s leading Computing Society, preserving the integrity of the scientific process is very much at the core of ACM’s mission. So much so that over the years ACM introduced, maintains, and periodically updates the ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct known universally as “The Code”, which was first introduced in 1966 as ACM’s Guidelines for Professional Conduct in Information Processing and then updated into the first Code of Conduct in 1972. Over the years, The Code has become the global standard for evaluating ethical and professional conduct for the Computing community.

Over the past decade, ACM has seen a significant increase in the number of claims of publications-related misconduct and as a result more recently established the Ethics + Plagiarism Committee of the ACM Publications Board to investigate and adjudicate such claims.

The E+P Committee, as we commonly refer to it inside ACM, has become one of the most active of the Publications Board committees and ACM has invested heavily in related tools and services to facilitate investigations and administer penalties related to cases of proven misconduct.

Since 2017, we have seen a steady rise in the number of claims ACM receives in connection with various types of Ethics, Plagiarism, and Publications Policy related misconduct.

The following tables provide data related to the number and types of cases ACM has investigated since 2017, including many cases that remain active today:

2017-2023 Ethics and Plagiarism Numbers Active Cases During Each Year

Year	Active Ethics Cases	Active Plagiarism Cases	Active Ethics + Plagiarism Cases *	Total Cases **
2017	10	10	1	21
2018	9	18	2	29
2019	20	33	6	59
2020	22	19	7	48
2021	3	4	0	7
2022	35	22	2	59
2023	44	29	1	74
Total Cases	143	135	19	297

* The “Active Ethics + Plagiarism Cases” column shows cases that deal with both potential ethics and plagiarism violations
** Active case numbers represent total ongoing cases in each of the above years, including carryover cases from previous years

2017-2023 Ethics and Plagiarism Numbers of New & Closed Cases Each Year

Year	New Ethics Cases	New Plagiarism Cases	New Ethics + Plagiarism Cases	Closed Ethics Cases	Closed Plagiarism Cases	Closed Ethics + Plagiarism Cases
2016	2	1	0	0	0	0
2017	8	9	1	7	6	1
2018	6	14	2	4	9	1
2019	15	24	5	13	26	4
2020	15	13	5	11	19	6
2021 YTD	7	4	0	6	1	0
2022	35	22	2	16	9	1
2023	23	14	1	26	14	1
Total Cases	111	101	16	83	84	14

2017-2023 Ethics and Plagiarism Claim Numbers by Publication Types

ACM Journals / Magazines	41 Claims
ACM Proceedings / Conference Publications	157 Claims
Non-ACM Publications *	25 Claims

*ACM regularly receives claims of potential misconduct in connection with non-ACM claims, although ACM Policy prevents ACM from investigating such claims

2017-2023 Ethics & Publications Policy Claim Numbers by Type of Potential Violations

Peer Reviewer Misconduct	28
Conflict of Interest	9
Coercion, Abuse, Harassment, Retaliation	9
Missing Author Attribution	15
Simultaneous Submission	11
Gift Authorship	3
Falsification of Research & Research Misconduct	12
Peer Reviewer	5
Attempted Pay to Publish	1
Changing Author Order Prior to Publication	1

2017-2023 Plagiarism Claim Numbers by Type of Potential Violations

Plagiarism	92
Self-Plagiarism	12
Combined Plagiarism and Simultaneous Submission	2
Combined Plagiarism and Reviewer Misconduct	1

As the summary data shows, there is a wide range of violation types. What the data doesn’t show is the severity of the claims ACM receives and what types of penalties are imposed on those found guilty of these violations. For the more severe types of violations, decision making is done by the E+P Committee (acting as a proxy for the ACM Publications Board) or in the most extreme cases by the ACM Publications Board itself.

The most serious ethics/plagiarism violations involve falsification of research and other forms of research misconduct; coercion and harassment-related misconduct; undeclared conflicts of interest and related misconduct; and peer reviewer-related misconduct.

Those found guilty of such violations face severe consequences that will likely have a tangible impact on their professional careers. ACM takes its obligation to preserve the integrity of the research we publish very seriously and as a result continue to invest significant time and resources to identify ways to improve our publications policies, how we investigate claims of misconduct, make it easier and safer for individuals who wish to come forward and make claims of potential misconduct, and to accelerate the decision-making process.

If anyone in the community feels that a violation of ACM publications policy has taken place, including plagiarism of a published ACM work, please visit the following ACM Violations Webpage, complete the Online Web Form to report the potential violation, and contact ACM’s Director of Publications once you have taken these initial steps if you have questions.