Auditing published papers (part II)

The papers I audit passed peer review before publication?

Well… sometimes it does not look like they did. 😒

The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ECCRI) states that: 

“Researchers (must) take seriously their commitment and responsibility to the research community, through refereeing, reviewing, and assessment”

Illustration by Mohamed_hassan.

Most of the time, scientists review the work of their peers solely for peer recognition. Gratification may never happen. When were you ever paid for that? 💸

Reviewers are obliged to confidentiality 🙊, must declare actual or perceived conflicts of interest 🙉, and respect the rights of authors 🙈 (i.e., not use the ideas/findings they are reviewing for their own research without permission).

With so little in terms of rewards, why would you do this immensely challenging, labour-intensive, and unpaid work?

Because the cost of not doing it far outweighs the discomfort. 💪

Peer review has uncovered:

  • Fabrication: making up data.

  • Falsification: manipulating protocols and/or omitting data without justification.

  • Plagiarism: using other's work or ideas without giving credit to the original source.
 

Good peer review is one of the main bastions in the evolution of knowledge.


Science builds on itself. I could never have uncovered some of the findings I did 📓, if I had not been able to trust the work published before I started. 📖

I learnt a lot by reading wonderfully descriptive and quite lyrical papers published in the 1960s and 1970s (for which I'm forever indebted to the British Library). But also from heavy-duty mathematical modelling (thank you Prof Pries!). This way, I could find context for me.

Next, I'll detail how I do it...

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Leave a comment!

London Book Fair 2024: challenges for publishers

Image
I went to London with a purpose. It’s always good to meet collaborators and friends, but I had other goals with my visit. You see, it’s never good when the decisions that impact us are arrived at without our input. I wanted to bring awareness of my new peer review standards project to those in the publishing industry that can benefit from them. I'm comfortable researching and reviewing, even editing and managing the peer review process, but hearing editors and publishers speak of the big picture issue was an eye-opener. Change is ever present The publishing industry fancies itself as having evolved to explore the heritage and lived experience of minorities, by more frequently placing a spotlight on hidden and undervalued communities. Jonathan Karp, who spoke on the current model of employee ownership that underpins his role as CEO at Simon & Schuster , perfectly exemplified this—with profits now being reinvested in the company, there’s a new collaborative...
Read more

How to spot fake reviewers: a beginner's guide

Image
For those unfamiliar with or new to academic publishing, peer review manipulation is hard to spot. This is mainly because most peer review reports are still confidential documents that stay buried deep in academic journal's editorial offices. As long as this continues to be the default, recognising good and bad peer reviews is difficult enough... now we have to worry about fake peer review as well?! 😒 Well, yes. Yes, we do. The peer review process in academic publishing is unlike any other. The style and content of a manuscript are criticized, as are the thought processes that birthed it. Everything from word choice to significance of the research focus is under scrutiny. In traditional peer review formats, reviewers recommend that manuscripts be accepted or rejected. This much power may make some less scrupulous people guiddy... or yearning to rig the system. The refereeing work that is supposed to be one of the garantors of research integrity is itself highly susceptible to ma...
Read more

London Book Fair 2024: OA and AI

Image
In a survey on the trends of academic publishing conducted in 2023, reflecting on the need to reformulate the current business model was front of mind. The need to optimize operational efficiencies may stem from the increased adoption of open access (OA) policies. For those not in the know, OA is a practice that enables research outputs to be distributed online, free of access charges or other barriers, including the ability for copy or reuse, by applying an open license for copyright. The mandates  advocated by the Holdren Memo in the US, the Nelson Memo in the UK, and Plan S for the EU consolidated the view that unrestricted access to research publications is part of an integral right for transparency—we want to view the outcomes of taxpayer-funded research. However, many publishers follow a gold OA model and charge an article processing charge (APC), which is typically paid through institutional or grant funding. This means that readers don't pay, because t...
Read more