Digital Science investigations show researchers associated with a fictitious research network and funding source have netted millions of taxpayers' dollars in funding. The post Digital Science investigation shows millions of taxpayers’ money has been awarded to researchers associated with fictitious network appeared first on Digital Science.| Digital Science
Will Vilhelm win a Nobel Prize of his own? And for what?| For Better Science
Trust in science is under threat from manipulation and disinformation. We need new tools like the Dimensions Author Check to protect research integrity.| Dimensions
"While papermills certainly pollute the literature the most in terms of numbers, I believe the spotlight should equally be on questionable research groups at top institutions, whose articles might have an even larger negative impact on society" - Aneurus Incostans| For Better Science
"I have been following the comments on PubPeer, and have been shocked, angered and appalled by the issues [...] there can be no explanation for this other than systemic fraud "- Prof Gareth Williams, UCL| For Better Science
Predatory journals prioritize self-interest, often financial, over scholarship They provide false information about their identity (eg, fake impact factors, misrepresented editorial boards), deviate from best editorial and publication practices, and lack transparency in operations (eg, editorial decisions, fees, peer review processes), along with aggressive solicitations of authors. Questa la definizione di rivista predatoria accolta in …| Open Science @Unimi
In un recente articolo pubblicato da PNAS e subito ripreso da Science si descrivono gli esiti di una ricerca che mira a tracciare i contorni della frode scientifica e che da attività individuale sembra invece essersi trasformata in un business vero e proprio.| Open Science @Unimi
Emerald Publishing has adopted Dimensions Author Check from Digital Science as part of Emerald’s ongoing commitment to research integrity.| Digital Science
If you missed any of our Q2 events, we invite you to catch up with the replays and downloadable presentations.| ORCID
Scholarly publishers can now fully integrate research integrity checks into their editorial and submission workflows with Dimensions Author Check API. The post Digital Science to strengthen research integrity in publishing with new Dimensions Author Check API appeared first on Digital Science.| Digital Science
Un articolo pubblicato sul Guardian fa il punto sulla situazione della letteratura scientifica, i problemi che la affliggono e le cause che conducono alla pubblicazione di articoli poco significativi o scritti e revisionati da sistemi di AI, o pubblicati senza alcun processo di validazione. | Open Science @Unimi
Un recente articolo apparso su Science affronta il tema del cattivo uso (a detrimento della scienza) che può essere fatto dei risultati di una attività, quella degli “investigatori della scienza” (science sleuths). Queste figure, nate da qualche anno, sulla scorta della constatazione che ci sono molte ricerche in cui gli autori tendono a “tagliare gli angoli”, usare immagini già prodotte per altre ricerche, escludere i risultati negativi o modificare i dati, sono impegnate a rileva...| Open Science @Unimi
Three Scholarly Kitchen Chefs report on the recent European Association of Science Editors (EASE) Conference (Oslo, May 14-16).| The Scholarly Kitchen
How does the Directory of Open Access Books navigate challenges to instill trust and transparency. Part 1 of 2.| The Scholarly Kitchen
The analysis of operational data is complex, dull, and unrewarding. It is also necessary. Three case studies of major journals and portfolios explain why.| The Scholarly Kitchen
The most vital and enduring contribution of scholarly publishers is their role as gatekeepers — not as obstacles to knowledge but as stewards of quality, integrity, and trust.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Science is built on a foundation of rigor and credibility. Preprints are adding to the crumbling of that foundation, which is already under attack by anti-science political agendas.| The Scholarly Kitchen
How are emerging trends in open research shaping the future of academia, and what challenges do they present? As international collaborations grow, what benefits do they offer, and what risks might they introduce? This article delves into these critical questions, examining their impact on the global research landscape – as highlighted by Dimensions data and […]| Dimensions
Dr Leslie McIntosh, Vice President of Research Integrity at Digital Science, recently shared her insights on how Dimensions Author Check addresses some of the challenges related to research integrity.| Dimensions
Lately, there have been many headlines on scientific fraud and journal article retractions. If this trend continues, it represents a serious threat […]| Social Science Space
Adapting to AI requires a commitment to fostering AI literacy and creating spaces to openly discuss its challenges and implications.| The Scholarly Kitchen
At the end of each quarter we’ll revisit past events and provide our community with a chance to catch up on anything they might have missed, including links to the […] The post 2025 First Quarter Events Roundup appeared first on ORCID.| ORCID
GPT based text generators like ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot have rapidly become a “cultural sensation”. This document provides scientific background and guidance on how to think critically and mindfully about these tools in academic writing and research.| The Ideophone
What can be done to resolve concerns about image integrity in scientific publications?| The Scholarly Kitchen
Image integrity has been a growing issue in scholarly publishing. Todd Carpenter suggests we addreess the problem of image integrity at scale| The Scholarly Kitchen
Like Tolkien's “Ents” marched against deforestation, scholars, scientists, and their supporters must awaken to the widespread risks of these authoritarian trends and unite their efforts in resistance.| The Scholarly Kitchen
I tried three different large language models (LLMs) to rewrite a potential article.| The Scholarly Kitchen
“Expressions of Concern may be used as an interim notice to flag a potential issue that may be ultimately resolved with another amendment outcome (e.g. retraction or correction) or they may r…| For Better Science
“One of the UK research system’s strengths is having established processes that allow for this review so that we maintain an accurate and robust research record. Promoting and improving this …| For Better Science
In response to US government efforts to censor research and researchers, a small group of scholarly communications professionals have launched a Declaration to defend research. Learn more in today's post by Alice Meadows, one of the members of this group.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Many publishers are getting nervous about infiltration by paper mills, who can torpedo a journal's reputation when they succeed in publishing papers that are obvious nonsense. In a recent Open Letter, a group of sleuths drew attention to an example in Scientific Reports, published by Springer Nature. | BishopBlog
16th October 2024 | BishopBlog
By Paola Galimberti The editorial note recently published in JASSS (Squazzoni 2025) focuses on the central role of peer review, an issue that has now become central to the debate on scholarly commu…| Review of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation
Self-archiving on personal sites is perfectly permitted under many journal data policies. But what happens when an author alters the underlying data?| The Scholarly Kitchen
The scholarly community is collectively facing a looming crisis as more false research is slipping into publication, threatening the integrity of the scholarly record. At ORCID, we believe we have […] The post Trust Markers in ORCID Records: Verified Email Domains appeared first on ORCID.| ORCID
“No paper — I would wager quite heavily that a large percentage, probably over 90% of papers in the public domain, have errors in them. Whether or not they be known, I would suggest th…| For Better Science
“The Investigative Committee notes that the infractions to normal scientific conduct surveyed in this report were blatant and repeated. Dr. [XY] should be dealt with in a manner consistent to…| For Better Science
It is essential to address the hidden costs of retraction and to discuss who needs to bear this cost.| The Scholarly Kitchen
What can we do to encourage and improve methods reporting in scientific articles? A new report summarizes recommendations for editors and publishers alike.| The Scholarly Kitchen
Do publishers really understand what tools researchers are using and how they are using them? Can we do more to create better policies based on real use cases and not hypothetical conjecture about what AI might do in the future?| The Scholarly Kitchen
“Every now and again, it is a good idea to open the door of the clown car that is MD Anderson, and see who climbs out. Today is the turn of Kapil N. Bhalla. If you say his name quickly, it so…| For Better Science
In this very interesting post, Professor Jennifer Byrne (University of Sydney Medical School and Children's Hospital at Westmead) looks at the mistakes being made in circRNAs papers, even in high-profile, supposedly high-quality and distinguished publications.| AHRECS
If someone asked you for some recommended reading or viewing to help them understand human research ethics, animal ethics or research integrity, what would you recommend? The policies and standards issued by National governments, learned societies, funding bodies and academic publications are generally not especially engaging or entertaining. In this blog post, Sally Dalton-Brown discusses a couple of options from the streaming and fiction publishing offerings. They won't exactly discuss, exp...| AHRECS