Julie Rehmeyer's 'Through the Shadowlands'
Writer Never Give Up talks about Julie Rehmeyer's new book "Through the Shadowlands: A Science Writer's Odyssey into an Illness Science Doesn't Understand" and shares an interview with Julie ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

The state of science publishing: neuroscientist tricks journals into accepting fake paper

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by Moof, Nov 11, 2018.

  1. Moof

    Moof Senior Member

    Messages:
    462
    Likes:
    1,122
    UK
  2. ryan31337

    ryan31337 Senior Member

    Messages:
    536
    Likes:
    1,226
    South East, England
    This one is a bit more serious, as it highlights a specific flaw in a technique - but it still gave me a good laugh:
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/n...ap-in-the-face-with-a-dead-fish/#.W-gjBNX7Rqs

    :D:D
     
  3. jesse's mom

    jesse's mom Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,931
    Likes:
    4,815
    Alabama USA
    oh, WOW!

    Check this out @Howard , knowing you love for Sci Fi.
     
    Moof likes this.
  4. lazzlazz

    lazzlazz

    Messages:
    57
    Likes:
    70
    Seattle
    I think it's important to note that they were targeting predatory journals.
    These are the ones that will simply take almost anything, and often, researchers pay to publish in them.
    Unfortunately, to be a good consumer of scientific research, you need to have an understanding of the (1) quality of the journal and (2) quality of the researchers on a paper.

    These predatory journals are creating a lot of garbage in the scientific literature I think someone needs to come up with a list of all journals and rates them on some scale: 1- 7, etc. It wouldn't be perfect. Sometimes, someone publishes mediocre research in an ok journal. The journal doesn't catch all the flaws because while the research is somewhat peripherally related to the focus of the journal (and perhaps in an interesting, valid way), the journal's reviewers don't have the expertise needed to deeply assess the quality.​

    Keep in mind that a single study is merely suggestive, even if published. If you keep this in mind, you won't be swayed strongly by any single study (including fake or dishonest ones that make it into the literature). You need a large body of literature, involving large-scale studies that are extremely well-done, using different methodologies, that provide converging evidence for certain conclusions. Unfortunately, this is expensive, and requires focus from agencies that can fund it. The smaller-scale studies can be suggestive and lead to funding being directed for larger studies, so well-done smaller studies, coming from respected researchers are important, but need to be interpreted cautiously. (ME/CFS researchers say this all the time in talks that you can view online..)

    "To test just how low the quality bar is for exploitative predatory journals, a prominent neuroscientist has tricked four publications into accepting a totally fake paper about midi-chlorians – the entirely fictional life forms in Star Wars that make ‘the force’ possible."
     

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page