A CITY IN THE HILL OR A DUNGEON IN THE VALLEY: WHERE ARE WE HEADING WITH OUR PRESENT PUBLICATION CULTURE
A CITY IN THE HILL OR A DUNGEON IN THE VALLEY: WHERE ARE WE HEADING WITH OUR PRESENT PUBLICATION CULTURE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37543/oceanides.v38i1.289Keywords:
Research assessment, Publication practice, Research Ethics, Authorship, Paper Retraction, PlagiarismAbstract
Many academic practices are questionable yet gaining increased practice. As a call of their responsibility, people concerned about such anomalies have expressed their agony on the issues in forums that have looked into some with a positive intent while ignoring others. Unfortunately, the ignored ones are growing daily, making ethically and intellectually sound minds cringe. This situation is largely due to a lack of corrective action in most cases due to lack of resources and few cases due to a lack of intent. This is a genuine review on the matter so far without highlighting any great institution (to undermine their reputation) or undermining the ignoramus ones (considering their lack of resources) worldwide. Instead, this article aims to highlight some of these anomalies for the attention of concerned intellectuals so that they can react quickly before it is too late for any remedial action.
Downloads
References
Abalkina, A. (2021). Publication and collaboration anomalies in academic papers originating from a paper mill: evidence from a Russia-based paper mill. In arXiv [cs.DL]. http://arxiv.org/ abs/2112.13322
Amrit B.L.S. (2022, July 22). Alzheimer’s research in turmoil as sleuths cast doubt on field-defining paper. Thewire.In. https://science.thewire.in/thesciences/alzheimers-study-manipulation-controversy/
Anonymous. (2020). Mdpi-res.com. Retrieved May 12, 2023, from https://res.mdpi.com/data/2020_web.pdf
Anonymous (2023). Taylorandfrancis.com. Retrieved May 12, 2023, from https://taylorandfrancis.com/partnership/commercial/accelerated-publication/
Cagan, R. (2013). The San Francisco declaration on research assessment. Disease Models & Mechanisms, 6(4), 869–870. https://doi.org/10.1242/ dmm.012955 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1242/dmm.012955
Else, H., & Van Noorden, R. (2021). The fight against fake-paper factories that churn out sham science. Nature, 591(7851), 516–519. https://doi. org/10.1038/d41586-021-00733-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00733-5
Getahun, H. (2022, July 9). After an AI bot wrote a scientific paper on itself, the researcher behind the experiment says she hopes she didn’t open a “Pandora’s box.” Insider. https://www.insider. com/artificial-intelligence-bot-wrote-scientificpaper-on-itself-2-hours-2022-7
Hvistendahl, M. (2013). China’s publication bazaar. Science (New York, N.Y.), 342(6162), 1035–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.342.6162.1035 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.342.6162.1035
Kelly, T. (2011, September 1). College Plagiarism Reaches All time high: Pew study. HuffPost. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/college-plagiarism-all-ti_n_944252
Lessig, L. (2018). Free Culture. How big media uses technology and the law to lock down culture and control creativity. Communiars. Revista de Imagen, Artes y Educación Crítica y Social, 1, 79– 99. https://doi.org/10.12795/communiars.2018. i01.09 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12795/Communiars.2018.i01.09
Mott-Smith, J. A. (2017, May 22). Why plagiarism is not necessarily deceitful or deserving of censure (essay). Inside Higher Ed | Higher Education News, Events and Jobs. https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2017/05/23/why-plagiarismnot-necessarily-deceitful-or-deserving-censureessay
Pennycook, A. (1996). Borrowing others’ words: Text, ownership, memory, and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, 30(2), 201. https://doi. org/10.2307/3588141 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3588141
Pérez-Peña, R. (2012, September 8). Studies find more students cheating, with high achievers no exception. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/08/education/studies-showmore-students-cheat-even-high-achievers.html
Ritchie, S. (2022, April 11). The big idea: should we get rid of the scientific paper? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/ apr/11/the-big-idea-should-we-get-rid-of-thescientific-paper
Schneider, L. (2020, January 24). The full-service paper mill and its Chinese customers. For Better Science. https://forbetterscience.com/2020/01/24/ the-full-service-paper-mill-and-its-chinese-customers/
Shankar Raman, T. R. (2021, April 4). Why I won’t review or write for Elsevier and other commercial scientific journals. Thewire.In. https://science. thewire.in/the-sciences/why-i-wont-review-orwrite-for-elsevier-and-other-commercial-scientific-journals/
Shtaltovna, Y. (2021). Is MDPI a reputable publisher?. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/ post/Is_MDPI_a_reputable_publisher/60e40a2e 8c1d727de2305554/citation/download
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Prasanta Panda
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
