4 ms·
But they provide a lousy and expensive filtering. So-called "high impact" journals suffer more retractions. http://peterdedmonds.blogspot.dk/2015/06/retraction
by biehl 11y ago
But they provide a lousy and expensive filtering.
So-called "high impact" journals suffer more retractions. http://peterdedmonds.blogspot.dk/2015/06/retractions-and-high-profile-journals.html http://peterdedmonds.blogspot.dk/2015/06/retractions-and-hig...
Society is most definitely well-served by completely decimating [legacy publishers] economic model. Legacy journals stand in the way of progress and they are laughably inefficient in what they do (filtering / online storage / layout (really!) )
- Retric 11y agoLow impact journals may be significantly worse, but if fewer people look for defects fewer defects get found.
- robotresearcher 11y agoIt's not suffer from retractions, but benefit from them. No one bothers to find errors in weak papers and weak journals don't bother to publish retractions. You would expect more retractions for the best journals because they still have decent standards. Related anecdote: I had a confererence publish a completely plagiarized article of mine, changing only the names of the authors. The paper still contained recognizable photos of my students performing the experiments. I reported this to the confererence and to the IEEE which owned the copyright to our original paper. No action of any kind was taken. Not even a 'knock it off' email.