Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
9,499
result(s) for
"Publishing - ethics"
Sort by:
The rise of predatory publishing and journals
Predatory publishing is a practice where businesses offer illegitimate and unethical publishing where an open access model is generally used with very little or no peer review at all. These publishers also charge high fees for article processing without the standard editorial or publishing standards for scientific disciplines. Predatory journals are an increasing phenomenon in dentistry, as in any healthcare academic publishing. This can mean poor-quality or false research is given false legitimacy and becomes available for dissemination and public consumption. They can be seen as an easy route to publish any work, particularly by junior colleagues who are trying to advance their academic careers. This article discusses the features and issues with predatory publishing while also highlighting the importance of ensuring healthcare literature remains credible, reputable and trustworthy.
Key points
Maintaining integrity in healthcare literature is essential.
Predatory journals and publishing are on the rise and it can be increasingly difficult to distinguish these from legitimate publications.
Junior colleagues may be most susceptible to predatory publishing due to pressures to publish for career progression.
Journal Article
Awareness of Jordanian Researchers About Predatory Journals: A Need for Training
The use of the open publishing is expected to be the dominant model in the future. However, along with the use of this model, predatory journals are increasingly appearing. In the current study, the awareness of researchers in Jordan about predatory journals and the strategies utilized to avoid them was investigated. The study included 558 researchers from Jordan. A total of 34.0% of the participants reported a high ability to identify predatory journals, while 27.0% reported a low ability to identify predatory journals. Most participants (64.0%) apply “Think. Check. Submit.” strategy to avoid predatory journals. However, 11.9% of the sample reported being a victim of a predatory journal. Multinomial regression analysis showed gender, number of publications, using Beall’s list of predatory journals, and applying “Think. Check. Submit.” strategy were predictors of the high ability to identify predatory journals. Participants reported using databases such as Scopus, Clarivate, membership in the publishing ethics committee, and DOAJ to validate the journal before publication. Finally, most participants (88.4%) agreed to attend a training module on how to identify predatory journals. In conclusion, Jordanian researchers use valid strategies to avoid predatory journals. Implementing a training module may enhance researchers’ ability to identify predatory journals.
Journal Article
Publication Pressure and Scientific Misconduct in Medical Scientists
There is increasing evidence that scientific misconduct is more common than previously thought. Strong emphasis on scientific productivity may increase the sense of publication pressure. We administered a nationwide survey to Flemish biomedical scientists on whether they had engaged in scientific misconduct and whether they had experienced publication pressure. A total of 315 scientists participated in the survey; 15% of the respondents admitted they had fabricated, falsified, plagiarized, or manipulated data in the past 3 years. Fraud was more common among younger scientists working in a university hospital. Furthermore, 72% rated publication pressure as “too high.” Publication pressure was strongly and significantly associated with a composite scientific misconduct severity score.
Journal Article
Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use
As researchers dive into the brave new world of advanced AI chatbots, publishers need to acknowledge their legitimate uses and lay down clear guidelines to avoid abuse.
As researchers dive into the brave new world of advanced AI chatbots, publishers need to acknowledge their legitimate uses and lay down clear guidelines to avoid abuse.
Credit: Tada Images/Shutterstock
Webpage of ChatGPT, a prototype AI chatbot, is seen on the website of OpenAI, on a smartphone
Journal Article
Stop this waste of people, animals and money
Predatory journals are easy to please. They seem to accept papers with little regard for quality, at a fraction of the cost charged by mainstream open-access journals. These supposedly scholarly publishing entities are murky operations, making money by collecting fees while failing to deliver on their claims of being open access and failing to provide services such as peer review and archiving.
Journal Article
The ethics of open access publishing
Should those who work on ethics welcome or resist moves to open access publishing? This paper analyses arguments in favour and against the increasing requirement for open access publishing and considers their implications for bioethics research. In the context of biomedical science, major funders are increasingly mandating open access as a condition of funding and such moves are also common in other disciplines. Whilst there has been some debate about the implications of open-access for the social sciences and humanities, there has been little if any discussion about the implications of open access for ethics. This is surprising given both the central role of public reason and critique in ethics and the fact that many of the arguments made for and against open access have been couched in moral terms. In what follows I argue that those who work in ethics have a strong interest in supporting moves towards more open publishing approaches which have the potential both to inform and promote richer and more diverse forms of public deliberation and to be enriched by them. The importance of public deliberation in practical and applied ethics suggests that ethicists have a particular interest in the promotion of diverse and experimental forms of publication and debate and in supporting new, more creative and more participatory approaches to publication.
Journal Article
How big is science’s fake-paper problem?
An unpublished analysis suggests that there are hundreds of thousands of bogus ‘paper-mill’ articles lurking in the literature.
An unpublished analysis suggests that there are hundreds of thousands of bogus ‘paper-mill’ articles lurking in the literature.
Journal Article
How to choose a journal and write a cover letter
Selecting a suitable journal for submitting a manuscript can be a complex and confusing task, and end in disappointment when a paper is rejected quickly for reasons that may not be clear to the author. There have been several articles written offering advice on journal selection, but this article is the most thorough of its kind, using recent evidence to inform the strategies presented. This article provides details on the factors involved in optimal journal selection, giving insights into how to identify suitable journals, why particular criteria are important and ideal methods to approach this task. The article also includes a spreadsheet tool for tracking information about potential titles of interest and submission details, and finally, provides notes on supporting your submission with an effective cover letter.
Journal Article