Difference between revisions of "Resource:A2fda758-06fa-47d9-9fdd-7f12fe36e8ee"
From The Embassy of Good Science
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
|Title=A publisher just retracted ten papers whose peer review was “engineered” — despite knowing about the problem of fake reviews for years | |Title=A publisher just retracted ten papers whose peer review was “engineered” — despite knowing about the problem of fake reviews for years | ||
| − | |Is About=This case is about a publisher, SAGE, who retracted 10 papers published as part of two special collections in ''Advances in Mechanical Engineering'' after discovering the peer review process that had been managed by the guest editors did not meet the journal’s usual rigorous standards<ref>https://retractionwatch.com/2018/07/12/publisher-has-known-of-problem-of-fake-reviews-for-years-so-how-did-10-papers-slip-its-notice/</ref>. | + | |Is About=This case which was made public by Retraction Watch is about a publisher, SAGE, who retracted 10 papers published as part of two special collections in ''Advances in Mechanical Engineering'' after discovering the peer review process that had been managed by the guest editors did not meet the journal’s usual rigorous standards<ref>https://retractionwatch.com/2018/07/12/publisher-has-known-of-problem-of-fake-reviews-for-years-so-how-did-10-papers-slip-its-notice/</ref>. This is a factual case. |
| − | + | <references /> | |
| − | + | |Important Because=It is important to keep in mind that reviewers can also commit scientific fraud. | |
| − | This is a factual case. | ||
| − | |Important Because=It is important to keep in | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
|Important For=Researchers | |Important For=Researchers | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 17: | Line 12: | ||
{{Related To}} | {{Related To}} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
| + | |Involves=Retraction Watch; Sage; Advances in Mechanical Engineering | ||
|Has Timepoint=12-7-2018 | |Has Timepoint=12-7-2018 | ||
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Honesty | |Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Honesty | ||
Revision as of 14:48, 20 May 2020
ResourcesCases
A publisher just retracted ten papers whose peer review was “engineered” — despite knowing about the problem of fake reviews for years
What is this about?
This case which was made public by Retraction Watch is about a publisher, SAGE, who retracted 10 papers published as part of two special collections in Advances in Mechanical Engineering after discovering the peer review process that had been managed by the guest editors did not meet the journal’s usual rigorous standards[1]. This is a factual case.
Why is this important?
It is important to keep in mind that reviewers can also commit scientific fraud.
