At Retraction Watch: … a massive list of retractions due to peer review rings

Here: “Exclusive: Hindawi and Wiley to retract over 500 papers linked to peer review rings”

Hindawi’s research integrity team found several signs of manipulated peer reviews for the affected papers, including reviews that contained duplicated text, a few individuals who did a lot of reviews, reviewers who turned in their reviews extremely quickly, and misuse of databases that publishers use to vet potential reviewers.

Ironically, it’s easier to trust science when we see something being done about fraud. Elite demands for blind trust don’t have anywhere near the same effect.

You may also wish to read: The hyper-specialization of university researchers. Jeffrey Funk and Gary Smith: So many papers are published today in increasingly narrow specialties that, if there is still a big picture, hardly anyone can see it. Researchers who do not know what is happening outside their own specialty can end up using discredited methods that they don’t even know are discredited.

Copyright © 2022 Uncommon Descent . This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement UNLESS EXPLICIT PERMISSION OTHERWISE HAS BEEN GIVEN. Please contact legal@uncommondescent.com so we can take legal action immediately.
Plugin by Taragana