Having collected data, it can be tempting to publish several articles on the same dataset. However, there is a difference between publishing articles with clear overlap, and distinct studies. In short, when the overlap is sufficient so that the studies could have been combined for a more impact article, it is not good. It distorts the literature and wastes the time of the reader, reviewers and editors.
Data overlap is acceptable in the case where: There are different and distinct questions with multiple and unrelated endpoints; and /or the data collection is large or drawn out that it is impractical to publish all simultaneously and other researchers would benefit from earlier publications.
To read more on this, see:
Kirkman, B. L. and Chen, G. (2011), Maximizing Your Data or Data Slicing? Recommendations for Managing Multiple Submissions from the Same Dataset. Management and Organization Review, 7: 433–446. doi:10.1111/j.1740-8784.2011.00228.x
Academy of Management ethics video series:
Ethics Video Series: Slicing the Data in Publications
This third in a series on Ethics of Research and Publishing discusses questions of: When is a paper really new? Can I publish more than one paper from a survey data set? ; Can I submit two similar papers to journals, one of which had two dependent variables and the other paper two different dependent variables but shared independent variables in common?
(Thank you to Elizabeth (Liz) Solberg for the presentation the content of this post is based on)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/37873897@N06/4334016639/