A recent experience at HRL Journal Service revealed an important gap in the publication process.
An author was working under pressure to meet a submission deadline set by their research institution. The author’s manuscript had already undergone editorial assessment and peer review involving editors and reviewers at one of our journals. However, while attempting to meet the institutional deadline, the author submitted the manuscript to another journal.
This created serious concerns about simultaneous or duplicate submission, uncertainty over the legitimate publication record, and the considerable editorial and peer-review work already invested in the manuscript. It also demonstrated that an originality declaration completed only at the beginning of submission may not always be sufficient. Circumstances can change while a manuscript is under review or awaiting publication.
This experience prompted HRL Journal Service to develop a publisher-managed Publication Assurance System.
After a manuscript has been officially accepted, the publisher will generate a secure link containing information retrieved from the journal’s submission workflow. The corresponding author will use the link to:
Confirm their identity and the manuscript details.
Declare whether the same manuscript has been submitted to another journal.
Explain the circumstances if another submission was made and state whether it was formally withdrawn.
Confirm the authors’ rights and grant the publisher permission to publish, distribute, preserve, and index the article.
Accept the applicable open-access and publication conditions.
Confirm the agreed publication payment and provide a transaction reference or payment evidence.
Upload an electronic signature and submit the declaration on behalf of the listed co-authors.
The system will then conduct an exact-title and similar-title screening across selected scholarly databases and public sources. A potentially matching record will not lead to an automatic accusation or rejection; instead, the case will be paused and referred to the publisher for further investigation. If no concerning match is identified, a formal PDF assurance record will be generated and provided to both the author and publisher.
The purpose of this system is not only to protect the publisher. It is also intended to protect authors’ rights, document the permission granted for publication, clarify the responsibilities of all parties, and help journals comply with accepted standards of publication ethics and open-access publishing.
From your experience, do you think a signed, post-acceptance Publication Assurance System would effectively reduce simultaneous and duplicate submissions?
Should the corresponding author be permitted to complete the declaration on behalf of all co-authors, or should every listed author provide separate confirmation?
What additional safeguards should publishers introduce to protect authors, editors, reviewers, journals, and the integrity of the scholarly record?
Authors, editors, reviewers, researchers, librarians, and publishers are invited to share their experiences and recommendations.
An author was working under pressure to meet a submission deadline set by their research institution. The author’s manuscript had already undergone editorial assessment and peer review involving editors and reviewers at one of our journals. However, while attempting to meet the institutional deadline, the author submitted the manuscript to another journal.
This created serious concerns about simultaneous or duplicate submission, uncertainty over the legitimate publication record, and the considerable editorial and peer-review work already invested in the manuscript. It also demonstrated that an originality declaration completed only at the beginning of submission may not always be sufficient. Circumstances can change while a manuscript is under review or awaiting publication.
This experience prompted HRL Journal Service to develop a publisher-managed Publication Assurance System.
After a manuscript has been officially accepted, the publisher will generate a secure link containing information retrieved from the journal’s submission workflow. The corresponding author will use the link to:
Confirm their identity and the manuscript details.
Declare whether the same manuscript has been submitted to another journal.
Explain the circumstances if another submission was made and state whether it was formally withdrawn.
Confirm the authors’ rights and grant the publisher permission to publish, distribute, preserve, and index the article.
Accept the applicable open-access and publication conditions.
Confirm the agreed publication payment and provide a transaction reference or payment evidence.
Upload an electronic signature and submit the declaration on behalf of the listed co-authors.
The system will then conduct an exact-title and similar-title screening across selected scholarly databases and public sources. A potentially matching record will not lead to an automatic accusation or rejection; instead, the case will be paused and referred to the publisher for further investigation. If no concerning match is identified, a formal PDF assurance record will be generated and provided to both the author and publisher.
The purpose of this system is not only to protect the publisher. It is also intended to protect authors’ rights, document the permission granted for publication, clarify the responsibilities of all parties, and help journals comply with accepted standards of publication ethics and open-access publishing.
From your experience, do you think a signed, post-acceptance Publication Assurance System would effectively reduce simultaneous and duplicate submissions?
Should the corresponding author be permitted to complete the declaration on behalf of all co-authors, or should every listed author provide separate confirmation?
What additional safeguards should publishers introduce to protect authors, editors, reviewers, journals, and the integrity of the scholarly record?
Authors, editors, reviewers, researchers, librarians, and publishers are invited to share their experiences and recommendations.