4 ms·

> A fake paper is fabricated research, which falls under the definition of misconduct. So should the authors of such spoof papers, who write those with the int

> A fake paper is fabricated research, which falls under the definition of misconduct. So should the authors of such spoof papers, who write those with the intention to expose flaws in the peer-review process of predatory journals be accused of misconduct themselves? There have been many discussions about that, such as in the case of the Sokal Hoax, where the author of the fake paper was accused of deceit. Another professor, Peter Boghossian, who did something like this was actually banned from further research by Portland State University. https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=13489 https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=13489

shureluck 6y ago
I love the fake papers. I think it is necessary, like a Snowden move, to expose how bad publications are at weeding out bad data and conclusions. It only serves to make the publishers look bad, not the writers.
- zeepzeep 6y ago
  It's the same with security. Hiding the fact that you're vulnerable doesn't make you secure. "Hacking is illegal", yeah, but you'll be hacked. -> Don't sue researchers!
- fabian2k 6y ago
  This is about a predatory open access journal that isn't even indexed on Pubmed. Scientists will never see papers from that journal anyway. And anyone publishing in it is either hopelessly naive and without support from an experienced researcher, or just publishing there to put publications on their CV, knowing that the paper will likely accept anything you throw at them.
  - JPLeRouzic 6y ago
    >> This is about a predatory open access journal that isn't even indexed on Pubmed. I have read very few strange things on Pubmed, but still some seems out of place in a medical/biology publications repository [0-2], so I have a question about indexation on Pubmed, is it possible to tweak this indexation to make it more stringent? [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28366104/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28366104/ [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17574055/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17574055/ [2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9324572/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9324572/
unishark 6y ago
From skimming the PSU story, it looks like there might be a political factor in that one. I wonder if the same objections would have been raised had his research goal been to expose sexism in acceptance rates of science journals or somehing, rather than expose gender studies as nonsense. >> A fake paper is fabricated research, which falls under the definition of misconduct. I think it's the same argument as with satire. The goal is not to defraud but to make a legitimate point. There is no mens rea.
- goto11 6y ago
  The whole affair seem to thoroughly politicized. The results are presented as if "grievance studies" should be particularly prone to publishing hoax papers, but there is no control used as far as I can tell, so who knows if other studies or disciplines or better or worse? Medicine certainly also seems to be vulnerable. Maybe the whole of academia and research has a problem with peer review and bad-quality journals? Science is different from satire. It is great satire to get a passage from Mein Kampf accepted by a feminist journal - but is it valid scientific research?
  - unishark 6y ago
    I'd say his goal was clearly to make a political point, not a scientific discovery. But making political points is not unethical behavior. As for the difference between science and satire, I think you missed my point. Which is that the argument is the same (i.e. mens rea, meaning intent to commit a crime), not the actual act.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - goto11 6y ago
      Obviously "making a point" or "satire" is not a valid justification for scientific fraud. Otherwise anyone caught in plagiarism or whatever could just use that excuse to avoid consequences. But if fraudulent or manipulated articles were used as part of legitimate research to study failures in the scientific system itself, it could be justified. But obviously it would have to be handled as serious research, itself peer reviewed and so on.

shureluck 6y ago

I love the fake papers. I think it is necessary, like a Snowden move, to expose how bad publications are at weeding out bad data and conclusions. It only serves to make the publishers look bad, not the writers.

zeepzeep 6y ago
It's the same with security. Hiding the fact that you're vulnerable doesn't make you secure. "Hacking is illegal", yeah, but you'll be hacked. -> Don't sue researchers!
fabian2k 6y ago
This is about a predatory open access journal that isn't even indexed on Pubmed. Scientists will never see papers from that journal anyway. And anyone publishing in it is either hopelessly naive and without support from an experienced researcher, or just publishing there to put publications on their CV, knowing that the paper will likely accept anything you throw at them.
- JPLeRouzic 6y ago
  >> This is about a predatory open access journal that isn't even indexed on Pubmed. I have read very few strange things on Pubmed, but still some seems out of place in a medical/biology publications repository [0-2], so I have a question about indexation on Pubmed, is it possible to tweak this indexation to make it more stringent? [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28366104/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28366104/ [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17574055/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17574055/ [2] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9324572/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9324572/

unishark 6y ago

From skimming the PSU story, it looks like there might be a political factor in that one. I wonder if the same objections would have been raised had his research goal been to expose sexism in acceptance rates of science journals or somehing, rather than expose gender studies as nonsense. >> A fake paper is fabricated research, which falls under the definition of misconduct. I think it's the same argument as with satire. The goal is not to defraud but to make a legitimate point. There is no mens rea.

goto11 6y ago
The whole affair seem to thoroughly politicized. The results are presented as if "grievance studies" should be particularly prone to publishing hoax papers, but there is no control used as far as I can tell, so who knows if other studies or disciplines or better or worse? Medicine certainly also seems to be vulnerable. Maybe the whole of academia and research has a problem with peer review and bad-quality journals? Science is different from satire. It is great satire to get a passage from Mein Kampf accepted by a feminist journal - but is it valid scientific research?
- unishark 6y ago
  I'd say his goal was clearly to make a political point, not a scientific discovery. But making political points is not unethical behavior. As for the difference between science and satire, I think you missed my point. Which is that the argument is the same (i.e. mens rea, meaning intent to commit a crime), not the actual act.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - goto11 6y ago
    Obviously "making a point" or "satire" is not a valid justification for scientific fraud. Otherwise anyone caught in plagiarism or whatever could just use that excuse to avoid consequences. But if fraudulent or manipulated articles were used as part of legitimate research to study failures in the scientific system itself, it could be justified. But obviously it would have to be handled as serious research, itself peer reviewed and so on.