April 16, 2011

Keeping science fair


Blind justice. A beautiful ideal! That the merits of a case are to be decided without regard to the identities of the parties involved or the size of their bank accounts.

This is something science aspires to in evaluating manuscripts for publication. In fact it’s fundamental to the integrity of science- when you read an article in a scientific journal, the idea is that you should know that the article went through the same review process as all the others.

The science you see in a prestigious journal is not there because the authors paid more than others did, but rather because the science was evaluated as high quality on its own merits. There are flaws in the process, such as the bias that occurs because usually the reviewers know who the manuscript authors are, but at least there’s no real money involved- nothing as meretricious as some cash to grease the wheels.

But now money has started to infiltrate the system. Several journals are now accepting money for “fast-track” services. It is hard to see how this policy can be implemented without sometimes giving the monied authors an advantage over those who don’t pay. Fast-tracking seems likely to leads to shortcut by the editor or reviewers as they seek to meet the fast-tracking deadline. And it seems these journals won’t even indicate which manuscripts benefited from fast-tracking and which didn’t.

Please join us in signing an open protest letter that we’ll soon send to these journals.

No comments:

Random Posts


  • The Dark Alleys of Turkish Academia

    Debora Weber-Wulff I published a short note in September 2012 about the work of a group of academics in Turkey. A. Murat Eren has now organized a translation of their work into English so that a wider group of scientists can take a peek into the very dark alleys of Turkish academia. ht... READ MORE>>

  • Düsseldorf Rescinds Doctorate of Education Minister Schavan - Copy, Shake and Paste

    The dean of the Arts and Humanities faculty of the University of Düsseldorf announced on the evening of February 5, 2013, that the faculty board voted 13:2 that the dissertation of Annette Schavan is a plagiarism. They also voted 12:2:1 to rescind her doctorate.There will be a flurry of press re... READ MORE>>

  • Top Science Scandals of 2012 - The Scientist

    Edyta Zielinska A widely discussed research study published this year showed that more than sloppy mistakes or accidental omissions, retracted papers are most likely to be withdrawn from publication because of scientific misconduct or knowlingly publishing false data. In fact, more than 65 perce... READ MORE>>

  • Elsevier editorial system hacked, reviews faked, 11 retractions follow - Retraction Watch

    For several months now, we’ve been reporting on variations on a theme: Authors submitting fake email addresses for potential peer reviewers, to ensure positive reviews. In August, for example, we broke the story of a Hyung-In Moon, who has now retracted 24 papers published by Informa because he man... READ MORE>>

  • Plagiarism and Essay Mills

    Dan Ariely Sometimes as I decide what kind of papers to assign to my students, I can’t help but think about their potential to use essay mills. Essay mills are companies whose sole purpose is to generate essays for high school and college students (in exchange for a fee, of course).  S... READ MORE>>

  • Higher education: Call for a European integrity standard - NATURE

    Nature 491,192(08 November 2012) doi:10.1038/491192d Alina Mungiu-Pippidi & Ligia Deca The global market for diplomas and academic rankings has had the unintended consequence of stimulating misconduct, from data manipulation and plagiarism, to sheer fraud. If incentives for integrity prov... READ MORE>>

  • Scientific fraud is rife: it's time to stand up for good science - The Guardian

    The way we fund and publish science encourages fraud. A forum about academic misconduct aims to find practical solutions    Peer review happens behind closed doors, with anonymous reviews only seen by editors and authors. This means we have no idea how effective it is. Photo: Alamy ... READ MORE>>

.

.
.

Popular Posts