Send us a link
Networks demand government and EU intervention to raise standards at universities and research institutions.
In a new analysis, scholars publicly accused of sexual misconduct experienced a significant decrease in the rate at which other scholars cited their published research.
Generated by plagiarism disguisers, these red flags can point to deeper problems with a paper
Addressing the link between poor treatment of early-career researchers and academic misconduct.
Institution leaders fear breach of privacy whereas transparency advocates call it an important step
How academic institutions can prevent sexual harassment and protect scientists.
Nature investigates multiple instances of scholars on working visas experiencing abuse and salary discrimination.
An inquiry into a university lecturer found he breached policy in an unprofessional relationship with a student.
Theranos case highlights the importance of peer review for biotech entrepreneurs, scientists say.
The five general tactics of science denial are: conspiracy, selectivity (cherry-picking), fake experts, impossible expectations (also known as moving goalposts), and general fallacies of logic.
Cartoon by Hilda Bastian (license) A total of 436 papers in two Springer Nature journals are being subjected to expressions of concern, in the latest case of special issues - in this case, "t…
As part of a misconduct crackdown, Chinese funders are penalizing researchers who commission sham journal articles from 'paper mills', but some say the measures still don't go far enough.
Bik's home address was posted on Twitter and she faced a barrage of attacks after dissecting a paper endorsing hydroxychloroquine as treatment.
Study of nearly 7,000 scientists also finds that more than half engage in 'questionable research practices'.
Prominent evolutionary biologist is the second to be removed from prestigious group for sexual misconduct.
Researchers say the complaint filed against Elisabeth Bik could have a 'chilling effect' on scholarly criticism.
An analysis of 32 countries finds differences between national guidance and Europe-wide code.
Context Convergent analyses in different disciplines support the use of the Percentage of Papers by the Most Prolific author (PPMP) as a red flag to identify journals that can be suspected of questionable editorial practices. We examined whether this index, complemented by the Gini index, could be useful for identifying cases of potential editorial bias, using a large sample of biomedical journals. Methods We extracted metadata for all biomedical journals referenced in the National Library of Medicine, with any attributed Broad Subject Terms, and at least 50 authored (i.e. by at least one author) articles between 2015 and 2019, identifying the most prolific author (i.e. the person who signed the most papers in each particular journal). We calculated the PPMP and the 2015-2019 Gini index for the distribution of articles across authors. When the relevant information was reported, we also computed the median publication lag (time between submission and acceptance) for articles authored by any of the most prolific authors and that for articles not authored by prolific authors. For outlier journals, defined as a PPMP or Gini index above the 95th percentile of their respective distributions, a random sample of 100 journals was selected and described in relation to status on the editorial board for the most prolific author. Results 5 468 journals that published 4 986 335 papers between 2015 and 2019 were analysed. The PPMP 95th percentile was 10.6% (median 2.9%). The Gini index 95th percentile was 0.355 (median 0.183). Correlation between the two indices was 0.35 (95CI 0.33 to 0.37). Information on publication lag was available for 2 743 journals. We found that 277 journals (10.2%) had a median time lag to publication for articles by the most prolific author(s) that was shorter than 3 weeks, versus 51 (1.9%) journals with articles not authored by prolific author(s). Among the random sample of outlier journals, 98 provided information about their editorial board. Among these 98, the most prolific author was part of the editorial board in 60 cases (61%), among whom 25 (26% of the 98) were editors-in-chief. Discussion In most journals publications are distributed across a large number of authors. Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications. The papers by these authors were more likely to be accepted for publication within 3 weeks of their submission. To enhance trust in their practices, journals need to be transparent about their editorial and peer review practices.
Cao Xuetao, president of Nankai University, will be barred from applying for grants for lax lab management.
Scammers set up fake institutional email accounts to deceive a chemistry publication's editorial team.
The Wellcome Trust pulled the grant from Nazneen Rahman, who worked at the Institute of Cancer Research in London.
After years of detective work, it's still unclear why a Japanese doctor faked dozens of clinical trials.
Physicist Jana Lasser of PhDnet discusses the group's new report.
Colleagues urge UCI to acknowledge the possibility that its sanctions against Professor Ayala were enacted in haste and to reopen the case and investigate the matter more thoroughly.
When scientists reach mid-career, they suddenly have to manage people, something they have never done and never really been trained to do.
Jocelyn Bell Burnell's skills on the radio telescope were on point. Following the discovery of pulsars, Bell Burnell faced casual sexism from the media and public as well.
