Fake Peer Reviews, the Latest Form of Scientific Fraud, Fool Journals

Autor/in	Fischman, Josh
Titel	Fake Peer Reviews, the Latest Form of Scientific Fraud, Fool Journals
Quelle	In: Chronicle of Higher Education, (2012) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0009-5982
Schlagwörter	Credentials; Ethics; Scientists; Deception; Peer Evaluation; Publishing Industry; Periodicals + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Studienbuch; Ethik; Scientist; Wissenschaftler; Täuschung; Periodical; Journal; Zeitschrift; Fachzeitschrift; Periodikum
Abstract	This article reports on how some scientists impersonate outside reviewers for journals and give high marks to their own manuscripts. Scientists appear to have figured out a new way to avoid any bad prepublication reviews that dissuade journals from publishing their articles: Write positive reviews themselves, under other people's names. In incidents involving four scientists--the latest case coming to light two weeks ago--journal editors say authors got to critique their own papers by suggesting reviewers with contact e-mails that actually went to themselves. According to Irene Hames, a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics, Blame lies with those journals that allow authors to nominate their own reviewers and do not check credentials and contacts. (ERIC).
Anmerkungen	Chronicle of Higher Education. 1255 23rd Street NW Suite 700, Washington, DC 20037. Tel: 800-728-2803; Tel: 202-466-1000; Fax: 202-452-1033; e-mail: circulation@chronicle.com; Web site: http://chronicle.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10