Retraction of papers in journals and Predatory journals .pptx
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•165 views
Retraction of papers in journals and Predatory journals
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Retraction of papers in journals and Predatory journals .pptx
Similar to Retraction of papers in journals and Predatory journals .pptx (20)
More from university of chinese academy of sciences
More from university of chinese academy of sciences (7)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Retraction of papers in journals and Predatory journals .pptx
- 1. Retraction of the papers in Journals and Predatory Journals Group11 Presenter-NamitaPaudelAdhikari Moderator-SurajShah Moderator-AnikDash Technicalcoordinator-IshfaqRasoolGujree
- 2. Outlines Section 1-Retraction of the papers in journals • Background • Reasons • Statistics • Possible ways to prevent • General Scenario— Worldwide & China based Section 2-Predatory Journal • Background • Introduction • Common characteristics • Harm to scholars and science • How to avoid them? • Helpful resources and Examples 2
- 3. Background • Research is simply unfinished until you publish your experiments or ideas for others to read • Publications is verification of your work by second person; recognition and acknowledgement as experts Article Retraction • It contains infringements of professional ethical codes Journal Editors shall act in accordance with COPE’s Retraction Article Correction • Honest error. • The Author or Contributor list is incorrect Article Withdrawal • Paper may contain errors, may have accidentally been submitted twice or may be in violation a journal’s publishing ethics guidelines Article Replacement • In cases where an article, may pose a serious health risk, the authors of the original paper may wish to retract the flawed original and replace it with a corrected version. Article removal • Problems are very serious in nature and cannot be addressed by a Retraction or Correction notice 3
- 4. What are the common reasons of Retraction? • Plagiarism and Duplication ("self-plagiarism") • Data Fabrication and Manipulation • Fake Peer Reviews and Publisher Error • Authorship Issues and Legal Reasons • Not Reproducible Watch • Efficiency and Pressure to publish 4 Adapted from j. You/science; (data) retraction watch; methodology
- 5. Requesting an article retraction • In the case of honest errors, retraction can be instigated by the paper’s authors or by the journal • In the case of ethical misconduct, an investigation is typically launched by the journal after having received a complaint from a reader Emailing the editor-in-chief of the journal directly • Article information: The paper’s identifying information such as title, authors and publication date • Concern with the article: The error or intentional deception that you believe this article contains • Reasoning: How you identified or discovered the error or deception • Any steps you have already taken: you may have already reported this to your institution’s ethics committee 5
- 6. Journal actions on receiving a retraction request • Ideally, Immediate reply to an email to discuss your concerns, and will give their ultimate decision • In the case of ethical misconduct and claim is credible, launch an investigation following the established guidelines • If the journal decides a retraction is required, it will publish a retraction notice: • Clearly relate to the original article by citing the title and linking to the original article • State the reason for the retraction clearly, specifying who is retracting the article (e.g. all of the authors, some of the authors or the journal itself) • Publishing promptly and be freely available to all readers 6
- 7. What does statistics tell us? 7 Adapted from j. You/science; (data) retraction watch; methodology
- 8. What’s about the China? Source: http://retractiondatabase.org/RetractionSearch.aspx 8
- 9. More on China.. • Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), and the Ministry of Education (MOE) • National Natural Science Foundation of China NSFC • Chinese Academy of Engineering (CAE), the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), and China Association of Science and Technology (CAST) • From 2002-2006, the MOE published a series of documents on ethics in higher education, which recommended that institutions establish organizations to promote academic ethics and establish oversight mechanism • November 2006, MOST adopted misconduct rules and get effective from January 2007, include policies and procedure for investigating and adjudicating misconduct as well as a definition of misconduct, which is boarder than the U.S. government’s definition of misconduct as fabrication, falsification or plagiarism (FFP) • January 2007, MOST established an office to deal with research ethics problems called the Office of Scientific Research Integrity • In 2007, CAST published a document addressing seven kinds of unethical behavior • In 2007, CAS, China’s most prestigious scientific organization, developed rules for dealing with research misconduct and established a high- level committee to investigate allegations and ordered its >100 institutes to develop misconduct rules 9 Adapted from Zeng, W., & Resnik, D. (2010)
- 10. What can be done to avoid retraction? • Follow the relevant ethics guidelines • Clearly state any conflicts of interest (COIs) • Take measures to avoid plagiarism • Declare all author affiliations • Select a journal wisely 10
- 11. Section 2 • Background • Introduction • Common characteristics • Harm to scholars and science • How to avoid them? • Helpful resources and Examples
- 12. Background • In 2008 Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado in Denver coined the term “predatory publishers” • Beall’s list became a widely followed piece of work by the mid-2010s • In January 2017, Beall removed the list from his blog, scholarlyoa.com. Allegedly, Beall "was forced to shut down his blog due to threats and politics • Cabells launched the Journal Blacklist, a subscription based searchable database of predatory journals in 2017 • Since its launch in 2017 the database has grown to cover more than 13,000 predatory journals, and is now known as Predatory Reports 12
- 13. Predatory Journal • Predatory publishing practices include falsely claiming to provide peer review, hiding information about article processing charges, misrepresenting members of the journal’s editorial board, and other violations of copyright or scholarly ethics (Elmore & Weston, 2020) • They offer to publish articles in return for a fee, but they do not offer services with regard to quality control and editing as you would expect from a blind peer reviewed scientific journal • Some journals are predatory on purpose, while others may make mistakes due to neglect, mismanagement, or inexperience 13
- 14. Common characteristics of predatory journals • Claims to be a peer-reviewed open-access publication but does not provide adequate peer review • Advertises a Journal Impact Factor or citation metric on website that is incorrect or cannot be verified • Publishes all articles for which authors pay an APC even if the article is low quality • Editorial board includes people who do not exist and mimics name or website of other well-known, legitimate journals • Aggressively targets potential authors through e-mails 14
- 15. How common are predatory journals? • As of 2015, there were an estimated 996 predatory publishers (including 447 publishers of standalone journals) that published over 11,800 journals • Of those, roughly 8,000 journal titles were active and published a total of approximately 420,000 articles • Roughly 15% of articles published in predatory journals are from United States authors. However, this accounts for less than 1% of the United States' total research output 15 Source: Shen et al., (2015) and The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (2022)
- 16. No list to rule them all • Assessments of which journals are likely to be predatory or legitimate do not tally, and titles can appear in both categories • There is no way to know which journals were considered for a list but left off or which were not considered (Grudniewicz et al., 2019) 16 Adapted from strinzel et al., (2019)
- 17. How the scam works? • Predatory journals exploit a new publishing model by claiming to be a legitimate open- access operation • Online predatory publishers take advantage of the Gold Open Access model. • Predatory journals make false claims to lure unwary authors into submitting papers • While sending a predatory journal a manuscript may see it "published" but no guarantee of inclusion in indexes like Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus It's important to realize that being Open Access does not make a journal predatory, their behavior does. 17
- 18. How the scam works? Classic Gold Open Access Journal Predatory Journal 18 Adapted from Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) 2018
- 19. What’s the harm? For the researcher/ its institution / funder: • Lack of credibility: paper won’t be seen as a proper scientific peer-reviewed article • Acceptability: paper won’t be accepted in an another journal • Lack of visibility: predatory journals are not included in proper databases • Lack of long-term storage: article can get removed without any notice • Editorial issues: predatory publishers often put contributors on their editorial board(without their consent)
- 20. What’s the harm? For Science itself: • Difficulty to distinguish good peer-reviewed articles from low quality papers • Decrease of general science quality • Almost impossible to obtain a retraction • Waste of resources(good research do not get the visibility they deserve)
- 21. Helpful tips to determine predatory journal • Are there spelling or grammatical mistakes or other questionable characteristics on their website or in the solicitation e-mail? • Is the peer review process clearly stated on the website? • Does the website clearly state the publishing fees? • Is the journal indexed in databases that you use,18 such as MEDLINE19 for biomedical journals? • Can you easily contact the publisher? • Is the journal a member of the Committee on Publication and Ethics (COPE) or Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) or listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) 21
- 22. Resources for identifying predatory journals Paid/Subscription resources • Cabells International • Cabells’ Whitelist • Cabells’ Blacklist • Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 22 Free resources • ThinkCheckSubmit.org • The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) • The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) • SCImago Journal Rank • National Library of Medicine (NLM) catalog • Stop Predatory Journals
- 23. Examples of predatory journals 23 Source: https://www.openacessjournal.com/blog/predatory-journals-list/
- 24. Can we link them? 24 Retraction of Papers • Majorly occurs due to authors • It can be related with correction of scientific integrity • Here we can question the authors role and reviewers responsibility Predatory Journals • Publishing House/Journals are responsible • Often prey on innocent researchers who are unaware of the threats of predatory publishing • Predatory journals is majorly a honey trap with promise of prosperity for pseudo- researchers
- 25. References 1. Campos-varela I. & Ruano-ravi A. (2019). Misconduct as the main cause for retraction . A descriptive study of retracted publications and their authors. 33, 356–360 2. COPE Council. COPE Retraction guidelines — English. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4 Version 2: November 2019 3. Elmore, S. A., & Weston, E. H. (2020). Predatory Journals : What They Are and How to Avoid Them. 48(4), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192623320920209 4. Grudniewicz, A., Moher, D., & Cobey, K. D. (2019). Predatory journals: no definition, no defence. 5. Jeffrey Beall - Wikipedia. En.wikipedia.org. (2022). Retrieved 28 March 2022, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Beall. 6. Resnik D.B., Wager E. & Grace E. (2015). Retraction policies of top scientific journals ranked by impact factor. J Med Lib Assoc 103, 136–139 7. Shen, Cenyu and Bo-Christer Bjork. "'Predatory' open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics." BMC Medicine 13, no. 1 (2015). 8. Strinzel, M., Severin, A., Milzow, K., & Egger, M. (2019). Blacklists and whitelists to tackle predatory publishing: a cross-sectional comparison and thematic analysis. MBio, 10(3), e00411-19. 9. Yeo-teh N.S.L. & Tang B.L. (2021). An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on Coronavirus Disease 2019. Accountability in Research 28, 47–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1782203 10. Zeng, W., & Resnik, D. (2010). Research integrity in China: problems and prospects. Developing world bioethics, 10(3), 164-171. 11. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02445-8 12. https://www.cwauthors.com/article/how-to-avoid-article-retraction 13. https://www.science.org/content/article/what-massive-database-retracted-papers-reveals-about-science-publishing-s-death-penalty 14. https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your-research/after-publication/corrections-to-published- articles/#:~:text=A%20Correction%20notice%20will%20be,competing%20interests%20of%20the%20authors. 25
- 26. 26 Thank you !! Let's have a discussion!!
Editor's Notes
- Journal Editors should consider retracting a publication if: 1. Guidelines (refer to ICMJE’s recommendations on Corrections, Retractions, Republications and Version Control or the U.S. National Library of Medicine’s policy on Errata, Retractions
- Salami slicing (using the same data set to publish multiple studies)
- Ideally, the journal will reply to your email immediately to discuss your concerns, and will give their ultimate decision If the journal finds the case of ethical misconduct and claim is credible, it will then typically launch an investigation following established guidelines. If the journal decides that, based on its investigation, a retraction is required, it will publish a retraction notice (on its website and/or in print, according to its publication model): Clearly relate to the original article by citing the title and linking to the original article. State the reason for the retraction clearly, specifying who is retracting the article (e.g. all of the authors, some of the authors or the journal itself). Be published promptly and be freely available to all readers. In rare cases, an expression of concern may be published during an investigation and later updated to a formal retraction. But generally, an expression of concern is reserved for instances in which the journal does not feel that it is likely to be able to satisfactorily complete the investigation
- It is important to familiarize yourself with the ethical guidelines issued by the recognized body in your field of expertise. Studies deemed unethical because of the treatment of animals or issues of privacy surrounding studies on people, to take just two examples, may be retracted Transparency is just as important for authors as it is for publishers and journals; readers must have all the information available to them to evaluate the limitations of the study. Therefore, ensure you disclose all COIs at the time of submission. When writing up your research, be sure to reference correctly and comprehensively; else, you may end up being guilty of plagiarism. Even when using or referring to material written or produced by yourself, the work must be correctly referenced. Self-plagiarism is a form of plagiarism and may lead to article retraction or at least redundancy. Finally, it is important to consider carefully which journal to submit your paper to. A reliable and reputed journal will have a rigorous editorial or review process in order to identify any experimental or calculation errors, thus minimizing the risk of your article being retracted further down the line. Selecting a journal according to industry guidelines (to avoid a retraction) Together, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) have compiled a set of publishing guidelines for open access (OA) journals. They could be used as a guide for selecting a reliable journal. Journal and publisher staff transparency: Staff details should be available on the company website. Editorial staff and referees: The names and affiliations of editorial staff should be available. Reviewers should be experts in their field so that they can give provide useful feedback on manuscripts. Procedures and protocol: The peer review process must be clearly indicated on the journal website, along with their publication schedule. Income and publishing fees: All publication costs must be stated clearly at the beginning of the process. Indexing and marketing: Journals and publishers must be open about where the journal is indexed, its impact factor (IF) and must not lock its proofs to hinder copyright checks and prevent scanning by search engines.
- issued reports on scientific integrity, developed oversight committees, and conducted investigations into ethical problems in science The above-mentioned organizations are working together to establish a joint committee on scientific integrity.
- It is important to familiarize yourself with the ethical guidelines issued by the recognized body in your field of expertise. Studies deemed unethical because of the treatment of animals or issues of privacy surrounding studies on people, to take just two examples, may be retracted Transparency is just as important for authors as it is for publishers and journals; readers must have all the information available to them to evaluate the limitations of the study. Therefore, ensure you disclose all COIs at the time of submission. When writing up your research, be sure to reference correctly and comprehensively; else, you may end up being guilty of plagiarism. Even when using or referring to material written or produced by yourself, the work must be correctly referenced. Self-plagiarism is a form of plagiarism and may lead to article retraction or at least redundancy. Finally, it is important to consider carefully which journal to submit your paper to. A reliable and reputed journal will have a rigorous editorial or review process in order to identify any experimental or calculation errors, thus minimizing the risk of your article being retracted further down the line. Selecting a journal according to industry guidelines (to avoid a retraction) Together, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) have compiled a set of publishing guidelines for open access (OA) journals. They could be used as a guide for selecting a reliable journal. Journal and publisher staff transparency: Staff details should be available on the company website. Editorial staff and referees: The names and affiliations of editorial staff should be available. Reviewers should be experts in their field so that they can give provide useful feedback on manuscripts. Procedures and protocol: The peer review process must be clearly indicated on the journal website, along with their publication schedule. Income and publishing fees: All publication costs must be stated clearly at the beginning of the process. Indexing and marketing: Journals and publishers must be open about where the journal is indexed, its impact factor (IF) and must not lock its proofs to hinder copyright checks and prevent scanning by search engines.
- Beall is well known for his investigations of predatory open access publishing, a term he coined. He has published a number of analyses of predatory OA journals, such as one of Bentham Open in The Charleston Advisor in 2009.[However, his interest in such journals began when, in 2008, he started to receive numerous requests from dubious journals to serve on their editorial boards. He has said that he "immediately became fascinated because most of the e-mails contained numerous grammatical errors. "Since 2008, he has maintained a well-known and regularly updated list of what he states are "potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers". In 2011, Beall's list had 18 publishers on it; by December 29, 2016, this number had grown to 923. Beall has estimated that predatory open access journals publish about 5-10 percent of all open access articles, and that at least 25 percent of open access journals are predatory.He has been particularly critical of OMICS Publishing Group, which he described as "the worst of the worst" in a 2016 Inside Higher Education article. Jeffrey Beall - Wikipedia. En.wikipedia.org. (2022). Retrieved 28 March 2022, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Beall. Beall also hosted a list of publishers he believed to be predatory on his blog, Scholarly Open Access, from 2012 to 2017
- Editorial board includes people who do not exist, do not have credentials relevant to the topic of the journal, have affiliations that cannot be verified, or are real people who are not aware that they are listed as members
- For comparison, this is roughly the same size, in both journal titles and articles published, as the legitimate open-access publishing industry Not all of these predatory journals are in biomedicine fields, but biomedicine is a major area for predatory publishers, and the prevalence of predatory journals varies between specific fields. (Shen and Bjork)
- ThinkCheckSubmit.org is a nonprofit website with a step-by-step guide to evaluating journal quality. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a nonprofit database containing a searchable list of high-quality, peer-reviewed open access journals in all scholarly disciplines. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is a group of publishing organizations that agree to uphold certain standards ethical publishing practices. The COPE website provides a searchable database of reputable publishers and journals, guidance for authors and editors on addressing suspected misconduct, and example cases and advice for authors that have dealt with predatory publishers. SCImago Journal Rank is a free online database that provides measures of journal citation rates based on data in the Scopus database. Journals in SCImago can be sorted and filtered by subject, country, and open-access status. Using SCImago can help you determine whether a journal is actually indexed in a major citation database and help you identify other high-quality journals in your subject area. For biomedical journals, you can check to see whether a journal is in the National Library of Medicine (NLM) catalog. If a journal’s entry in the NLM Catalog is listed as “Currently indexed for MEDLINE” that means that all new articles published in this journal will appear in the citation database PubMed. If a journal is not in the NLM catalog or has an entry in the NLM Catalog but is not listed as indexed for MEDLINE that may mean that it is either not considered a biomedical journal or that it might not be considered a trustworthy journal. Stop Predatory Journals is a crowd-sourced project that provides lists of potentially predatory journals and publishers, journals with names intended to imitate those of legitimate journals, and potentially fake or misleading journal metrics systems. However, the administration is anonymous so the process for labeling predatory publishers lacks transparency. Cabells International is a for-profit company that sells 2 subscription-based journal directories—Cabells’ Whitelist, which contains journals verified to provide high-quality, peer review, and transparent business practices, and Cabells’ Blacklist, which contains journals with questionable or problematic business practices. Both lists contain in-depth explanations for each entry, an explanation of their methods, and ways for users and publishers to report errors or appeal miscategorizations. Journal Citation Reports (JCR) is a journal analysis tool that is currently owned and maintained by Clarivate Analytics. JCR uses data from Web of Science, a subscription citation database also owned by Clarivate, to provide high-quality measures of journal impact metrics, including Journal Impact Factor (JIF). This tool can help authors verify citation metrics for potentially predatory journals and identify high quality journals in their field.
- ThinkCheckSubmit.org is a nonprofit website with a step-by-step guide to evaluating journal quality. The Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is a nonprofit database containing a searchable list of high-quality, peer-reviewed open access journals in all scholarly disciplines. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is a group of publishing organizations that agree to uphold certain standards ethical publishing practices. The COPE website provides a searchable database of reputable publishers and journals, guidance for authors and editors on addressing suspected misconduct, and example cases and advice for authors that have dealt with predatory publishers. SCImago Journal Rank is a free online database that provides measures of journal citation rates based on data in the Scopus database. Journals in SCImago can be sorted and filtered by subject, country, and open-access status. Using SCImago can help you determine whether a journal is actually indexed in a major citation database and help you identify other high-quality journals in your subject area. For biomedical journals, you can check to see whether a journal is in the National Library of Medicine (NLM) catalog. If a journal’s entry in the NLM Catalog is listed as “Currently indexed for MEDLINE” that means that all new articles published in this journal will appear in the citation database PubMed. If a journal is not in the NLM catalog or has an entry in the NLM Catalog but is not listed as indexed for MEDLINE that may mean that it is either not considered a biomedical journal or that it might not be considered a trustworthy journal. Stop Predatory Journals is a crowd-sourced project that provides lists of potentially predatory journals and publishers, journals with names intended to imitate those of legitimate journals, and potentially fake or misleading journal metrics systems. However, the administration is anonymous so the process for labeling predatory publishers lacks transparency. Cabells International is a for-profit company that sells 2 subscription-based journal directories—Cabells’ Whitelist, which contains journals verified to provide high-quality, peer review, and transparent business practices, and Cabells’ Blacklist, which contains journals with questionable or problematic business practices. Both lists contain in-depth explanations for each entry, an explanation of their methods, and ways for users and publishers to report errors or appeal miscategorizations. Journal Citation Reports (JCR) is a journal analysis tool that is currently owned and maintained by Clarivate Analytics. JCR uses data from Web of Science, a subscription citation database also owned by Clarivate, to provide high-quality measures of journal impact metrics, including Journal Impact Factor (JIF). This tool can help authors verify citation metrics for potentially predatory journals and identify high quality journals in their field.