More Papers Retracted For Fake Reviews
From the intrepid folks at Retractionwatch.com:
Springer is pulling another 64 articles from 10 journals after finding evidence of faked peer reviews, bringing the total number of retractions from the phenomenon north of 230. Given that there have been about 1,500 papers retracted overall since 2012, when we first reported on the phenomenon, faked reviews have been responsible for about 15% of all retractions in the past three years.
And from the folks at Springer from yesterday’s announcement:
Springer confirms that 64 articles are being retracted from 10 Springer subscription journals, after editorial checks spotted fake email addresses, and subsequent internal investigations uncovered fabricated peer review reports. After a thorough investigation we have strong reason to believe that the peer review process on these 64 articles was compromised. We reported this to the Committee on Publishing Ethics (COPE) immediately. Attempts to manipulate peer review have affected journals across a number of publishers as detailed by COPE in their December 2014 statement. Springer has made COPE aware of the findings of its own internal investigations and has followed COPE’s recommendations, as outlined in their statement, for dealing with this issue. Springer will continue to participate and do whatever we can to support COPE’s efforts in this matter.
In addition, Retractionwatch reports that SAGE journals retracted 17 papers recently, with one of the retractions involving authorship fraud in addition to peer review fraud. This is in addition to the 60 papers SAGE retracted last year. From the SAGE spokesperson:
In all 17 cases, our investigation found the peer review processes had been severely compromised by fake reviewer details that were supplied to manipulate the peer review process. The investigations and subsequent retractions are a reflection of improved processes and guidance provided by SAGE to editors and peer review assistants that SAGE further enhanced following a group of retractions in 2014. Today’s retractions are historical in nature and reflect SAGE’s efforts to uncover instances of fraud that predate the new process.
Reactionwatch is run by The Center for Scientific Integrity, a 501c3 non-profit organization whose stated purpose “is to promote transparency and integrity in science and scientific publishing, and to disseminate best practices and increase efficiency in science.”
More power to them!