Case Study: Conflict of Interest

Dr. Rodriguez was assigned as a peer reviewer for a manuscript investigating a topic in her field of expertise.

Dr. Rodriguez was unaware that the lead author of the submitted manuscript, Dr. Stevens, had recently joined a research consortium that included Dr. Rodriguez’s longtime colleague, Dr. Carter. Their collaboration was not widely known, as their partnership was still in its early stages and had not been officially disclosed.

As Dr. Rodriguez delved into the manuscript, she noticed a familiarity with some of the research methods outlined in the paper. She decided to investigate further and discovered the new and ongoing collaboration between Dr. Stevens and Dr. Carter. Based on this, she anticipated that she and Dr. Stevens might collaborate in the future and, realizing the potential for bias, she faced a dilemma in maintaining objectivity during the review process.

Dr. Rodriguez recognized the need for transparency and immediately brought the potential COI to the attention of the handling editor who assigned her the paper. The editorial team opted to involve an additional reviewer with no known connections to the authors or their affiliations. Dr. Rodriguez provided detailed comments on the manuscript to ensure a comprehensive and impartial review.

This case study underscores the importance of peer reviewers remaining vigilant for potential COIs, even when these conflicts may not be immediately apparent. Dr. Rodriguez's ethical decision to disclose the potential bias led to a fair and unbiased review process, ultimately strengthening the credibility of the scientific publication.

Back to course

Module 2: Assessing Your Suitability to Review

Case Study: Conflict of Interest

Module 2

►Assessing Your Suitability to Review

Module 3: Review Touchstones

Module 4: Evaluating the Paper

Module 5: Submitting Your Review

Module 6: Artifact Review and Badging

ACM Peer Reviewer Certification Exam

COMPLETE

✓ Module 1: Peer Review Overview