Correcting the scientific record – A broken system?
Mark J Bolland, Andrew Grey, Alison Avenell, A. A. Klein
Abstract
Mark J Bolland, Andrew Grey, Alison Avenell, A. A. Klein
Abstract
The current system for assessing and publicly notifying concerns about publication integrity is slow, inefficient, inconsistent, inadequate, and opaque. Readers are, therefore, left unaware of potential issues about publications or are given inadequate information to assess publication integrity. We propose a new process for dealing with publication integrity involving the establishment of independent panel(s) that assess publication integrity and transparently report the outcomes of those assessments, independent of the assessment of any misconduct.
OpenAlex reports 22 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The current system for assessing and publicly notifying concerns about publication integrity is slow, inefficient, inconsistent, inadequate, and opaque. Readers are, therefore, left unaware of potential issues about publications or are given inadequate information to assess publication integrity. We propose a new process for dealing with publication integrity involving the establishment of independent panel(s) that assess publication integrity and transparently report the outcomes of those assessments, independent of the assessment of any misconduct.
Key concepts: Research integrity, Scientific misconduct, Scientific integrity, Misconduct, Data integrity, Academic integrity, Process (computing), Computer science