Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Johnny Matson (US), former professor of psychology at Louisiana State University, who was criticized starting in 2015 for his peer review practices as a journal editor, [127] [128] in 2023 had 24 of his research papers retracted because of undisclosed conflicts of interest, duplicated methodology, and a compromised peer-review process. [129] [130]
Once the method and analysis plan is vetted through peer-review, publication of the findings is provisionally guaranteed, based on whether the authors follow the proposed protocol. One goal of registered reports is to circumvent the publication bias toward significant findings that can lead to implementation of questionable research practices ...
During the COVID-19 pandemic, academia had seen a quick increase in fast-track peer-review articles dealing with SARS-CoV-2 problems. [8] As a result, a number of papers have been retracted made "Retraction Tsunami" [ 9 ] due to quality and/or data issues, leading many experts to ponder not just the quality of peer review but also standards of ...
The peer review provided by PLOS ONE was reported to be the most rigorous of all, and it was the only journal that identified the paper's ethical problems, for example the lack of documentation of how animals were treated in the creation of the cancer cell lines.
Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work . [1] It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.
Peer review in scientific journals assumes that the article reviewed has been honestly prepared. The process occasionally detects fraud, but is not designed to do so. [204] When peer review fails and a paper is published with fraudulent or otherwise irreproducible data, the paper may be retracted. A 1998 experiment on peer review with a ...
It is the violation of scientific integrity: violation of the scientific method and of research ethics in science, including in the design, conduct, and reporting of research. A Lancet review on Handling of Scientific Misconduct in Scandinavian countries provides the following sample definitions, [1] reproduced in The COPE report 1999: [2]
The duties of peer review may conflict with social interests or institutional loyalties; to avoid such COIs, reviewers may be excluded if they have some forms of COI, such as having collaborated with the author. [41] Readers of academic papers may spot errors, informally or as part of formal post-publication peer review.