Difference between revisions of "Resource:A2fda758-06fa-47d9-9fdd-7f12fe36e8ee"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Resource | {{Resource | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
| − | |Title= | + | |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 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://staging.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> | |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://staging.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 /> | ||
Revision as of 14:39, 20 October 2020
ResourcesDubious 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]
- ↑ https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1687814018783797
- ↑ 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.
