Most researchers are aware of least publishable units and so-called salami publications as unethical practices. The norms appear to be universal and clear about reporting research ethically and completely, citing sources carefully, and no duplication. Are they? In some interdisciplinary venues I've heard arguments for duplication, albeit selective, of research reporting. How else, the researcher asked, can you get the word out about your research unless you publish (the similar results) in the different disciplines' journals? Interestingly, the Cornell University Library Repository has a number of articles by Phil Davis exploring the subtle nuances of this complex issue, in our own LIS disciplines:
The Ethics of Republishing: A Case Study of Emerald/MCB University Press Journals, LRTS 49 (2) 2005; Article duplication in Emerald/MCB journals is more extensive than first reported: Possible conflicts of financial and functional interests are uncovered, LRTS 49 (3) 2005; and an editorial in Portal 5 (2) 2005, Who's to Blame for Article Duplication?