A recent submission to Journal A raised concerns about potential self-plagiarism. The article underwent scrutiny using anti-plagiarism software, revealing a 17% similarity index, within the journal's acceptable limit of 20%. However, upon peer review, it was discovered that the content substantially overlapped with a paper previously published in conference proceedings, reaching nearly 80% similarity.
Upon investigation, the authors explained that they had initially submitted only an abstract to the conference, which was later accepted contingent upon submission of the full article. However, they had stipulated that the article should not be included in the conference proceedings, intending instead to publish it in a recognized journal. Despite multiple attempts to communicate this to the conference organizers, they received no response.
The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) suggests that regardless of the authors' awareness, this constitutes a case of duplicate submission. Lack of response from the conference organizers does not absolve the authors of responsibility. Consequently, if the authors did not receive confirmation from the conference, the paper should remain in the proceedings, precluding its publication in the journal.
Considering the potential value of the research, and the authors' apparent oversight, Journal A may propose resubmission after substantial revision. This would involve paraphrasing, augmenting with original content, and obtaining proper copyright clearance or ownership from the conference. By referencing the initial conference publication, the revised paper could be treated as a new submission, adhering to journal standards and ethical guidelines.