Editorial: Multiple outputs from single studies: acceptable division of findings vs. 'salami' slicing

Abstract

In this information age, transgressions in publishing ethics can readily occur and many people are concerned that these behaviours are on the rise. The term 'salami slicing' is considered to be a publication transgression, carrying connotations of inappropriate practice and referring to publishing an excessive number of papers from a single study. Salami slicing describes 'artificially segmented articles in which related aspects of the same study were published separately' (Bailey 2012, p. 212). As implied by this definition, the term suggests that each paper is so thin (akin to slices of salami) and that the whole purpose of multiple outputs is to bolster author CVs, perceived performance and scholarly standing rather than disseminate research findings with integrity. Indeed, the practice is said to be driven primarily by the ambition of authors, particularly from a 'publish or perish' culture, with pressure for staff to publish in academic journals for tenure, promotion and other career progression opportunities.