Difference between revisions of "Resource:A2fda758-06fa-47d9-9fdd-7f12fe36e8ee"

From The Embassy of Good Science
m (Text replacement - "staging.embassy.science" to "embassy.science")
 
(2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{Resource
 
{{Resource
 
|Resource Type=Cases
 
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=Engineered Peer Reviews Lead to 10 Retractions
+
|Title=Dubious Peer Reviews Lead to 10 Retractions
|Is About=In 2018  SAGE retracted 10 papers which had been published in ''Advances in Mechanical Engineering.'' The reason for [https://staging.embassy.science/wiki/Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0 retraction] was the discovery of the peer review of all 10 papers being fake. The published papers were of unsatisfactory quality, eventually resulting in its retraction<ref>McCook, A. "A publisher just retracted ten papers whose peer review was ‘engineered’." ''Retraction Watch.(Downloaded on 26 September 2018 from <nowiki>https://retractionwatch</nowiki>. com/2018/07/page/3/)'' (2018).</ref>.
+
|Is About=In 2018  SAGE retracted 10 papers which had been published in ''Advances in Mechanical Engineering.'' The journal states the peer review process was flawed. Once the papers were scrutinized by new reviewers the articles tecnical errors in the data was discovered.<ref>https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1687814018783797</ref>  The published papers were of unsatisfactory quality and were eventually, retracted. However, [https://retractionwatch.com/ Retraction Watch] speculated the reason for [https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0 retraction] being the discovery of the peer review of all 10 papers being fake.<ref>McCook, A. "A publisher just retracted ten papers whose peer review was ‘engineered’." ''Retraction Watch.(Downloaded on 26 September 2018 from <nowiki>https://retractionwatch</nowiki>. com/2018/07/page/3/)'' (2018).</ref>  
 
<references />
 
<references />
|Important Because=Peer review is an important process to detect the flaws of to-be-published papers. This step of the publication process needs to be performed in order to increase the quality of scientific papers. When peer review is 'sloppy', or even fake in the case above, the quality will likely be low, and erroneous papers can be published.
+
|Important Because=Peer review is an important process to detect the flaws of to-be-published papers. This step of the publication process needs to be performed in order to increase the quality of scientific papers. When peer review is 'sloppy', or even allegedely fake, the quality will likely be low, and erroneous papers can be published.
  
 
<br />
 
<br />

Latest revision as of 20:24, 27 October 2020

Cases

Dubious Peer Reviews Lead to 10 Retractions

What is this about?

In 2018 SAGE retracted 10 papers which had been published in Advances in Mechanical Engineering. The journal states the peer review process was flawed. Once the papers were scrutinized by new reviewers the articles tecnical errors in the data was discovered.[1] The published papers were of unsatisfactory quality and were eventually, retracted. However, Retraction Watch speculated the reason for retraction being the discovery of the peer review of all 10 papers being fake.[2]

  1. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1687814018783797
  2. McCook, A. "A publisher just retracted ten papers whose peer review was ‘engineered’." Retraction Watch.(Downloaded on 26 September 2018 from https://retractionwatch. com/2018/07/page/3/) (2018).

Why is this important?

Peer review is an important process to detect the flaws of to-be-published papers. This step of the publication process needs to be performed in order to increase the quality of scientific papers. When peer review is 'sloppy', or even allegedely fake, the quality will likely be low, and erroneous papers can be published.


For whom is this important?

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
5.1.6