petersuber, (edited )
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Another reason not to rest research or journal/publisher/university on counts.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.04607

"Intrigued by a citation-boosting service that we unravelled during our investigation, we contacted the service while undercover as a fictional author, and managed to purchase 50 citations. These findings provide conclusive evidence that citations can be bought in bulk, and highlight the need to look beyond citation counts."

petersuber,
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Update. " 'The capacity to purchase citations in bulk is a new and worrying development,' says Jennifer Byrne, a cancer researcher at the University of Sydney who has studied problematic publications in the biomedical literature…A researcher’s h-index and the number of citations they’ve garnered are often used for hiring and promotion decisions."
https://www.science.org/content/article/vendor-offering-citations-purchase-latest-bad-actor-scholarly-publishing

18+ Frances_Larina,
@Frances_Larina@sfba.social avatar

@petersuber

Gee, maybe - just maybe - the entire publish-or-perish and highly profitable journals system itself is the root of the problem. We were taught peer review would suss out all problems, but that was a smokescreen as the only mechanism allowed it is to publish a rebuttal in the same highly siloed journal.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • ngwrru68w68
  • DreamBathrooms
  • khanakhh
  • magazineikmin
  • InstantRegret
  • ethstaker
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • rosin
  • slotface
  • osvaldo12
  • everett
  • kavyap
  • Durango
  • megavids
  • cubers
  • tester
  • GTA5RPClips
  • modclub
  • mdbf
  • cisconetworking
  • tacticalgear
  • Leos
  • normalnudes
  • anitta
  • provamag3
  • JUstTest
  • lostlight
  • All magazines