Research fraud, more politely termed questionable research practices, has been receiving increasing attention in the academic literature and in journal editorial circles. The Journal of Marketing Channels (JMC) Editorial Review Board and originality checking software (i.e., CrossCheck) have found several instances of questionable research practices ranging from submitting a paper for publication already published elsewhere (i.e., self-plagiarism) to a paper whose front end had many problems followed by a discussion and conclusions section that was state of the art. CrossCheck flagged the discussions and conclusions section as being verbatim from an unusual source: an article already published by completely different authors (i.e., plagiarism).1 Plagiarism and self-plagiarism are particularly troubling questionable research practices for journal editors as we have a responsibility to strictly adhere to applicable copyright laws of the United States, especially as articles published elsewhere and then republished in whole or in part a second time in a different journal are likely to violate copyright restrictions associated with the prior publication. Editors, reviewers, and authors simply must not knowingly violate the publisher’s guidelines regarding the exclusivity and proprietary nature of other authors’ intellectual contributions. Consequently, every submission and revision at JMC is checked for originality with the CrossCheck software. Although I do not want this editorial to become a “how-to” instruction manual on publishing misconduct, it is important that those of us in the academic community who submit papers to journals, review these submissions, publish them, study them, teach their content to classes, and use their findings in our own work or to influence public policy become fully aware of these issues.

中文翻译：

---

研究欺诈和学术界的出版或灭亡

研究造假，更礼貌地称为有问题的研究实践，在学术文献和期刊编辑圈中越来越受到关注。Journal of Marketing Channels (JMC) 编辑审查委员会和原创性检查软件（即 CrossCheck）发现了几个有问题的研究实践实例，从提交已在其他地方发表的论文（即自我抄袭）到一篇论文的前沿end 有很多问题，然后是最先进的讨论和结论部分。CrossCheck 将讨论和结论部分标记为来自不同寻常来源的逐字记录：一篇已经由完全不同的作者发表的文章（即抄袭）。1 抄袭和自我抄袭对期刊编辑来说尤其令人不安的有问题的研究实践，因为我们有责任严格遵守美国适用的版权法，尤其是在其他地方发表的文章，然后在同一时间再次全部或部分重新发表时。不同的期刊可能会违反与先前出版物相关的版权限制。编辑、审稿人和作者不得故意违反出版商关于其他作者智力贡献的排他性和专有性质的准则。因此，JMC 的每一份提交和修订都使用 CrossCheck 软件进行原创性检查。虽然我不希望这篇社论成为关于出版不当行为的“操作指南”，