The science ‘reproducibility crisis’ – and what can be done about it

“The solution to the scientific reproducibility crisis is to move towards Open Research – the idea that scientific knowledge of all kinds should be openly shared as early as it is practical in the discovery process. We need to reward the publication of research outputs along the entire process, rather than just each journal article as it is published.”

Pay to play? Three new ways companies are subverting academic publishing – Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch

“Some recent communications from companies involved in academic publishing have some journal representatives worried. In one instance, a manuscript editing company offered to pay an editor to help its papers get published in his journal; in another, a research ethics company threatened to investigate all of an author’s papers if he or she didn’t donate thousands to support the company’s efforts. Bottom line: Research authors (and editors) should beware companies offering unethical manuscript editing and other publishing services. Below are examples (which we’ve verified) compiled by Chris Graf, Co-Vice Chair of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and Society Partnership Director at Wiley; Richard Holt, editor-in-chief of Diabetic Medicine and researcher at the University of Southampton; Tamara Welschot, the Director of Research Integrity and Publishing Services at Springer Nature; and Matt Hodgkinson, Head of Research Integrity, Hindawi Limited.”

The first report of charging to re-use open access content

“The earliest report to our knowledge of publishers charging to re-use open access content, was by palaeontologist and renowned advocate for open access Mike Taylor who observed in 2012 that Elsevier were charging for non-commercial, educational re-use of Creative Commons Attribution licensed ‘open access’ articles.

The journal involved was Neuron.

[…]

You can read the full text of Mike’s report here: https://svpow.com/2012/03/21/pay-to-download-elseviers-open-access-articles/

If you know of any earlier reports please do let us know. This is important history to document. We would like this website to be the ultimate one-stop-shop evidence dossier for the continuously-repeated failings of academic publishers.”

Paywall Watch

“Paywall Watch is a website dedicated to monitoring and documenting notable problems at academic publishers.

TL;DR we are like Retraction Watch, but we focus on fraud and incompetent errors made by academic publishers. 

Unlike most multi-billion dollar industries there is virtually no regulation in the academic publishing market. Publishers can get away with seemingly anything. Poor service, poor ethics, and outrageous prices are a common feature of the market. We hope the aggregation of content on this website will empower funders, authors, readers, subscribers, research institutes and libraries to make better choices in future when it comes to entrusting scholarly research outputs with digital service providers….”

Paywall Watch

“Soon after Peter Murray-Rust had noted that Elsevier and RightsLink were selling permissions to re-use ‘open access’ content, he blogged about Springer and RightsLink doing the same thing too.

In August 2013, Peter wrote a blog post entitled Springer charge academics for using CC-NC ‘Open Access’ in lectures.

The price set by Springer and RightsLink to re-use 2 figures from a single ‘open access’ paper in classroom materials was an eye-watering $151.80.

The journal involved was Drugs in R&D. “

The high-tech war on science fraud | Science | The Guardian

“Statcheck had read some 50,000 published psychology papers and checked the maths behind every statistical result it encountered. In the space of 24 hours, virtually every academic active in the field in the past two decades had received an email from the program, informing them that their work had been reviewed. Nothing like this had ever been seen before: a massive, open, retroactive evaluation of scientific literature, conducted entirely by computer….”

Academics pay journals to publish ghost-written articles to get promotions – Global Times

“Scandals involving plagiarism and publication ethics have been plaguing Chinese academia for a long time. A recent expose by Plagiarism Watch, a US-based website that monitors academic plagiarism, is the latest to further reveal the murky side of the Chinese academic world….All these journals are open-access journals, which means they are either financed by an institution or by article processing charges paid by submitting authors. On average, these journals charge between $1,350 to $2,250 to publish an article. Cheng Weihong, a reviewer at the Crop Journal published by the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, once attempted to calculate the total article processing charges paid by Chinese researchers to open access journals in 2015. He arrived at the staggering figure of $72.17 million, or 470 million yuan….”

Academics pay journals to publish ghost-written articles to get promotions – Global Times

“Scandals involving plagiarism and publication ethics have been plaguing Chinese academia for a long time. A recent expose by Plagiarism Watch, a US-based website that monitors academic plagiarism, is the latest to further reveal the murky side of the Chinese academic world….All these journals are open-access journals, which means they are either financed by an institution or by article processing charges paid by submitting authors. On average, these journals charge between $1,350 to $2,250 to publish an article. Cheng Weihong, a reviewer at the Crop Journal published by the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, once attempted to calculate the total article processing charges paid by Chinese researchers to open access journals in 2015. He arrived at the staggering figure of $72.17 million, or 470 million yuan….”