4 ms·
Speaking as an academic, this seems overblown. Sure you can publish any crap in one of these fake journals. But nobody cares about those journals, or has even
by dash2 12y ago
Speaking as an academic, this seems overblown.
Sure you can publish any crap in one of these fake journals. But nobody cares about those journals, or has even heard their names. For all the credibility you gain, you might as well upload it to scribd.
- lvs 12y agoIn the particular context in which this is written, I think it's likely to be accurate. Optimally, MD's should show research credentials for career advancement, but the system rarely gives them the time to do serious research.
- Crito 12y agoThe situation of fake/shit journals and career incentives to publish in them strikes me as similar to the issue of for-profit "universities" in the US. These are apparently popular among school teachers, who can often get union-assured raises by getting a new degree (the quality of the degree not being considered). Nobody with much sense thinks that a degree from a for-profit "school" lends credibility, but they can nevertheless be used to further a career.
- greenyoda 12y ago"But nobody cares about those journals..." People who are familiar with the field don't care about these journals. The problem is that poorly fact-checked popular media are more than happy to cite these journals in click-bait articles touting "A Miraculous Cure for Pancreatic Cancer", which are widely disseminated to readers who don't have the scientific background to evaluate them rigorously. They see that the research was published in The Foobar Journal of Crypto-Oncology, and assume that it's reliable. And if no reputable journal has published a cure for pancreatic cancer yet, the junk-journal articles will be at the top of the search results.