4 ms·

I'd argue that a lot of what the authors describe isn't actually "fraud", it's more exploitation of an intentionally broken system. I've definitely had author

I'd argue that a lot of what the authors describe isn't actually "fraud", it's more exploitation of an intentionally broken system. I've definitely had authors on my papers who didn't do work. I've definitely written papers for people who didn't do work. I've definitely done peer reviews on behalf of PIs. Why do people do this? Because the regulators allow it and they want the system that way. Why should who wrote the paper have any impact on review? Why should it matter who the journal editors are? Why should it matter where the paper is from? Etc...

MattGaiser 6y ago
Because we use heuristics instead of actual analysis. How many people citing a paper or reading it actually have time to think that deeply about it? The alternative to a world of trust and heuristics is a world where we are all bogged down trying to make decisions. This is heavily demonstrated in recruiting. Resume reading is about 7 seconds a person. How long would it take if they spent a minute for each?