A recent incident has brought to light the challenge of dealing with misrepresentation of journal decisions on social media platforms. An author, upon receiving a decision of 'major revision' for their submitted paper, opted to withdraw the article instead of revising it, citing disagreements with the reviewers. Subsequently, the author posted the paper on various websites, accompanied by commentary naming the journal and editor and falsely claiming that the paper was rejected by reviewers, rather than being asked for major revisions.
The editor, upon becoming aware of these posts, reached out to the author multiple times requesting the removal of references identifying the journal, emphasizing the inaccuracy of the information about the editorial decision. Despite these requests, the author persisted in their misrepresentation, even publicly disclosing their intention to have the individual reviewer recommendations revealed.
While the journal may have limited recourse in this situation, particularly if the criticism does not constitute defamation, there are steps that can be taken to address the issue. Firstly, the editor could contact the author to reiterate the journal's policies and the importance of adhering to them. This includes clarifying the peer review process, the role of reviewers and editors, and the confidentiality of reviewer recommendations. The author should be informed that the information they have uploaded is incorrect and should be corrected.
Additionally, the editor could emphasize the significance of accurately representing the journal's decision and request the removal of any content derived from the review reports, as permission is required to disclose such information. If necessary, the involvement of the author's institution may be escalated to ensure compliance and to educate on proper conduct in academic publishing.
Ultimately, while the journal may not be able to compel the author to remove their posts, it is essential to uphold the integrity of the peer review process and to take proactive measures to address misrepresentations that may undermine the journal's reputation and credibility.