Difference between revisions of "Resource:A2fda758-06fa-47d9-9fdd-7f12fe36e8ee"
From The Embassy of Good Science
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
|Title=Engineered Peer Reviews Lead to 10 Retractions | |Title=Engineered Peer Reviews Lead to 10 Retractions | ||
| − | |Is About=SAGE retracted 10 papers published | + | |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>. |
<references /> | <references /> | ||
| − | |Important Because= | + | |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 For=Researchers; Peer reviewers; Editors | |Important For=Researchers; Peer reviewers; Editors | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Related To | {{Related To | ||
| − | |Related To Theme=Theme:29d64b53-eba2-489b-937d-440d6cd118d8;Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0 | + | |Related To Resource=Resource:E083cc57-7e32-4e00-b688-8928e8becfa9;Resource:Adad1721-62c8-46fd-83f9-617770437d90;Resource:1b777e40-9d7f-4ef4-a601-6be70c9e386a |
| + | |Related To Theme=Theme:29d64b53-eba2-489b-937d-440d6cd118d8;Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0;Theme:Ecc7ac02-6e53-4634-b053-91045c50390c;Theme:3a32df5c-e6e8-45f9-8132-434db3985a65;Theme:9025f215-cc6a-4b00-894b-68b9a089f173 | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
|Involves=Retraction Watch; Sage; Advances in Mechanical Engineering | |Involves=Retraction Watch; Sage; Advances in Mechanical Engineering | ||
| − | |Has Timepoint= | + | |Has Timepoint=2018 |
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Honesty | |Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Honesty | ||
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Peer reviewing; Self peer review | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Peer reviewing; Self peer review | ||
| − | |Related To Research Area=Mechanical engineering | + | |Related To Research Area=PE - Physical Sciences and Engineering; PE 08.08 - Mechanical and manufacturing engineering (shaping, mounting, joining, separation) |
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 09:33, 15 September 2020
ResourcesCases
Engineered 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 reason for 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[1].
- ↑ 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 fake in the case above, the quality will likely be low, and erroneous papers can be published.
