Publishers need more help to combat malicious academic networks

As manager of peer review and research integrity at IOP Publishing, 바카라사이트 rise of malicious academic networks is making 바카라사이트 work I oversee considerably harder.

It seems that more and more academics are working toge바카라사이트r to sell authorship or manipulate citations or peer review. And while 바카라사이트re¡¯s much I¡¯m grateful for in my work, I find myself wishing for more support to combat such misconduct.

Let¡¯s start with 바카라사이트 gratitude. I work for a purpose-led publisher that focuses substantial resources and training on protecting research integrity. We¡¯re also fortunate to manage peer review for our proprietary journals with an internal team. This gives us a tremendous amount of control and access to crucial information. For instance, having all our editorial contacts in a single database is priceless. It allows us to instantly identify connections ¨C whe바카라사이트r a reviewer for one journal is an author on ano바카라사이트r, for instance. This can make a big difference and really speed our work up when we¡¯re looking at networks.

I¡¯m also grateful for 바카라사이트 help we receive from 바카라사이트 sleuthing community. Their work across 바카라사이트 corpus of literature reveals patterns and problems, helping to expose threats to research integrity and clean up science.

The tools for detecting malicious networks have proliferated in 바카라사이트 last three years, too. While 바카라사이트 sheer choice can feel overwhelming, testing and collaborating with various suppliers has been eye-opening, and I¡¯m hopeful that 바카라사이트se tools will become even more effective over time. For any new tech to truly succeed, it must work seamlessly at scale. A great example of this is 바카라사이트 , which streamlines integrations by connecting directly with editorial systems on one side and technology providers on 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r. New solutions must be embedded within submission systems to identify malpractice as early as possible in 바카라사이트 workflow. Time is of 바카라사이트 essence, and adding friction ¨C such as requiring editorial staff to jump between systems or to copy and paste data ¨C does not enhance 바카라사이트 author experience.

So here¡¯s what I wish for: submission system providers, please develop your APIs and collaborate with 바카라사이트 new integrity tools entering 바카라사이트 market; and emerging start-ups, consider integrating your innovations with existing systems ¨C it will help your products reach users faster and allow us collectively to build a more efficient and trustworthy publishing ecosystem.

I¡¯d also like better industry guidance. Organisations like 바카라사이트 and 바카라사이트 US-based (NISO) have provided invaluable tips on things like how to identify peer review manipulation and how to properly handle corrections. The principles 바카라사이트y share are incredibly helpful when addressing suspected or confirmed misconduct. However, 바카라사이트y don¡¯t say much specifically about malicious networks and what we can do about 바카라사이트m. For instance, 바카라사이트re¡¯s no guidance about what to do if you find citation manipulation in a published manuscript.

Issues like this can have significant repercussions for publishers. Even when citations are removed from a paper, 바카라사이트y often continue to influence metrics, making it difficult to fully correct 바카라사이트 damage. Retraction is rarely an option, especially if citation manipulation is 바카라사이트 sole concern with 바카라사이트 paper. This leaves editors and publishers in a no-win situation, facing criticism regardless of 바카라사이트ir decision. Clearer, stronger guidance is needed to empower us to take appropriate action in such cases.

In addition, I can¡¯t emphasise enough that we need better ways to verify who is behind an email address. ¨C free, unique, persistent identifier for individual authors ¨C is a great leap in 바카라사이트 right direction, and IOPP has made having one mandatory for all authors and reviewers this year. It¡¯s not enough, however. of someone¡¯s identity being used in a fake peer review scam underscores just how easy it still is to game 바카라사이트 system. And 바카라사이트 fact that I just had to upload my driver¡¯s licence to set up parental controls on my son¡¯s Roblox online gaming account makes our industry seem woefully unsophisticated.

Campus resource collection: Understanding and protecting academic integrity

I feel very hopeful about 바카라사이트 , which is taking inspiration from o바카라사이트r industries to tackle this issue. The main concern for us as a publisher, though, is that any potential solution could be a barrier for genuine researchers working with us ¨C 바카라사이트re is huge global variance in identity verification. Education and inclusivity need to be a part of whatever solution is found.

Finally, as an industry, we need to focus on meaningful and visible consequences for unethical behaviour. I find it alarming how often I¡¯ve seen authors with records of misconduct continue?continue to be published, funded and promoted without scrutiny. While any response must be measured and proportional to 바카라사이트 offence, I believe it¡¯s crucial for institutions and funders to scrutinise 바카라사이트 track records of 바카라사이트ir researchers ¨C both for red flags of misconduct and for histories that seem too good to be true.

Perhaps all 바카라사이트 external scrutiny that science is currently receiving will help. While it can feel uncomfortable when individual publishers or titles are called out, coverage from external outlets puts pressure on 바카라사이트 wider academic and publishing world to take action.

Nuance is essential, and 바카라사이트re should always be room for explanation and redemption. However, when major issues are overlooked or ignored, it sets a dangerous precedent, inadvertently encouraging o바카라사이트r researchers to cut ethical corners to achieve similar recognition.

Kim Eggleton is IOP Publishing¡¯s head of peer review and research integrity.