A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review
Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Dadkhah, Mehdi [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2017 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Science and engineering ethics - Springer Netherlands, 1995, 24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:24 ; year:2017 ; number:5 ; day:15 ; month:08 ; pages:1603-1610 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
OLC2029179698 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC2029179698 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230402075620.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 200819s2017 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC2029179698 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-He213)s11948-017-9960-9-p | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 100 |a 500 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 19,2 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Dadkhah, Mehdi |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2017 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Peer review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Fabricated peer review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Fake peer review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Academic misconduct | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Academic ethics | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Integrity of peer review | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kahani, Mohsen |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Borchardt, Glenn |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Science and engineering ethics |d Springer Netherlands, 1995 |g 24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610 |w (DE-627)19230397X |w (DE-600)1304534-9 |w (DE-576)051378167 |x 1353-3452 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:24 |g year:2017 |g number:5 |g day:15 |g month:08 |g pages:1603-1610 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-TEC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHY | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-CHE | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-MAT | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-TGE | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 24 |j 2017 |e 5 |b 15 |c 08 |h 1603-1610 | ||
| author_variant |
m d md m k mk g b gb |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:13533452:2017----::mtofrmrvntenert |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2017 |
| publishDate |
2017 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 doi (DE-627)OLC2029179698 (DE-He213)s11948-017-9960-9-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 500 VZ 19,2 ssgn Dadkhah, Mehdi verfasserin aut A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily. Peer review Fabricated peer review Fake peer review Academic misconduct Academic ethics Integrity of peer review Kahani, Mohsen aut Borchardt, Glenn aut Enthalten in Science and engineering ethics Springer Netherlands, 1995 24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610 (DE-627)19230397X (DE-600)1304534-9 (DE-576)051378167 1353-3452 nnns volume:24 year:2017 number:5 day:15 month:08 pages:1603-1610 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-TGE GBV_ILN_70 AR 24 2017 5 15 08 1603-1610 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 doi (DE-627)OLC2029179698 (DE-He213)s11948-017-9960-9-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 500 VZ 19,2 ssgn Dadkhah, Mehdi verfasserin aut A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily. Peer review Fabricated peer review Fake peer review Academic misconduct Academic ethics Integrity of peer review Kahani, Mohsen aut Borchardt, Glenn aut Enthalten in Science and engineering ethics Springer Netherlands, 1995 24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610 (DE-627)19230397X (DE-600)1304534-9 (DE-576)051378167 1353-3452 nnns volume:24 year:2017 number:5 day:15 month:08 pages:1603-1610 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-TGE GBV_ILN_70 AR 24 2017 5 15 08 1603-1610 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 doi (DE-627)OLC2029179698 (DE-He213)s11948-017-9960-9-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 500 VZ 19,2 ssgn Dadkhah, Mehdi verfasserin aut A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily. Peer review Fabricated peer review Fake peer review Academic misconduct Academic ethics Integrity of peer review Kahani, Mohsen aut Borchardt, Glenn aut Enthalten in Science and engineering ethics Springer Netherlands, 1995 24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610 (DE-627)19230397X (DE-600)1304534-9 (DE-576)051378167 1353-3452 nnns volume:24 year:2017 number:5 day:15 month:08 pages:1603-1610 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-TGE GBV_ILN_70 AR 24 2017 5 15 08 1603-1610 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 doi (DE-627)OLC2029179698 (DE-He213)s11948-017-9960-9-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 500 VZ 19,2 ssgn Dadkhah, Mehdi verfasserin aut A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily. Peer review Fabricated peer review Fake peer review Academic misconduct Academic ethics Integrity of peer review Kahani, Mohsen aut Borchardt, Glenn aut Enthalten in Science and engineering ethics Springer Netherlands, 1995 24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610 (DE-627)19230397X (DE-600)1304534-9 (DE-576)051378167 1353-3452 nnns volume:24 year:2017 number:5 day:15 month:08 pages:1603-1610 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-TGE GBV_ILN_70 AR 24 2017 5 15 08 1603-1610 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 doi (DE-627)OLC2029179698 (DE-He213)s11948-017-9960-9-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 100 500 VZ 19,2 ssgn Dadkhah, Mehdi verfasserin aut A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review 2017 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily. Peer review Fabricated peer review Fake peer review Academic misconduct Academic ethics Integrity of peer review Kahani, Mohsen aut Borchardt, Glenn aut Enthalten in Science and engineering ethics Springer Netherlands, 1995 24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610 (DE-627)19230397X (DE-600)1304534-9 (DE-576)051378167 1353-3452 nnns volume:24 year:2017 number:5 day:15 month:08 pages:1603-1610 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-TGE GBV_ILN_70 AR 24 2017 5 15 08 1603-1610 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Science and engineering ethics 24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610 volume:24 year:2017 number:5 day:15 month:08 pages:1603-1610 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Science and engineering ethics 24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610 volume:24 year:2017 number:5 day:15 month:08 pages:1603-1610 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Peer review Fabricated peer review Fake peer review Academic misconduct Academic ethics Integrity of peer review |
| dewey-raw |
100 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Science and engineering ethics |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Dadkhah, Mehdi @@aut@@ Kahani, Mohsen @@aut@@ Borchardt, Glenn @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2017-08-15T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
19230397X |
| dewey-sort |
3100 |
| id |
OLC2029179698 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2029179698</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230402075620.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2017 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2029179698</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11948-017-9960-9-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">100</subfield><subfield code="a">500</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">19,2</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dadkhah, Mehdi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Peer review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Fabricated peer review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Fake peer review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Academic misconduct</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Academic ethics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Integrity of peer review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kahani, Mohsen</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Borchardt, Glenn</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Science and engineering ethics</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Netherlands, 1995</subfield><subfield code="g">24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)19230397X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1304534-9</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)051378167</subfield><subfield code="x">1353-3452</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:24</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2017</subfield><subfield code="g">number:5</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1603-1610</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-CHE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-MAT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TGE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">24</subfield><subfield code="j">2017</subfield><subfield code="e">5</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield><subfield code="h">1603-1610</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Dadkhah, Mehdi |
| spellingShingle |
Dadkhah, Mehdi ddc 100 ssgn 19,2 misc Peer review misc Fabricated peer review misc Fake peer review misc Academic misconduct misc Academic ethics misc Integrity of peer review A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review |
| authorStr |
Dadkhah, Mehdi |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)19230397X |
| format |
Article |
| dewey-ones |
100 - Philosophy & psychology 500 - Natural sciences & mathematics |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut |
| collection |
OLC |
| remote_str |
false |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1353-3452 |
| topic_title |
100 500 VZ 19,2 ssgn A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review Peer review Fabricated peer review Fake peer review Academic misconduct Academic ethics Integrity of peer review |
| topic |
ddc 100 ssgn 19,2 misc Peer review misc Fabricated peer review misc Fake peer review misc Academic misconduct misc Academic ethics misc Integrity of peer review |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 100 ssgn 19,2 misc Peer review misc Fabricated peer review misc Fake peer review misc Academic misconduct misc Academic ethics misc Integrity of peer review |
| topic_browse |
ddc 100 ssgn 19,2 misc Peer review misc Fabricated peer review misc Fake peer review misc Academic misconduct misc Academic ethics misc Integrity of peer review |
| format_facet |
Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
nc |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Science and engineering ethics |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
19230397X |
| dewey-tens |
100 - Philosophy 500 - Science |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Science and engineering ethics |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)19230397X (DE-600)1304534-9 (DE-576)051378167 |
| title |
A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)OLC2029179698 (DE-He213)s11948-017-9960-9-p |
| title_full |
A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review |
| author_sort |
Dadkhah, Mehdi |
| journal |
Science and engineering ethics |
| journalStr |
Science and engineering ethics |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
100 - Philosophy & psychology 500 - Science |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2017 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
1603 |
| author_browse |
Dadkhah, Mehdi Kahani, Mohsen Borchardt, Glenn |
| container_volume |
24 |
| class |
100 500 VZ 19,2 ssgn |
| format_se |
Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Dadkhah, Mehdi |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 |
| dewey-full |
100 500 |
| title_sort |
a method for improving the integrity of peer review |
| title_auth |
A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review |
| abstract |
Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily. © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 |
| abstractGer |
Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily. © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily. © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-MAT SSG-OLC-TGE GBV_ILN_70 |
| container_issue |
5 |
| title_short |
A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 |
| remote_bool |
false |
| author2 |
Kahani, Mohsen Borchardt, Glenn |
| author2Str |
Kahani, Mohsen Borchardt, Glenn |
| ppnlink |
19230397X |
| mediatype_str_mv |
n |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T21:59:48.564Z |
| _version_ |
1803596845379747843 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2029179698</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230402075620.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2017 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2029179698</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11948-017-9960-9-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">100</subfield><subfield code="a">500</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">19,2</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dadkhah, Mehdi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Peer review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Fabricated peer review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Fake peer review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Academic misconduct</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Academic ethics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Integrity of peer review</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kahani, Mohsen</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Borchardt, Glenn</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Science and engineering ethics</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Netherlands, 1995</subfield><subfield code="g">24(2017), 5 vom: 15. Aug., Seite 1603-1610</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)19230397X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1304534-9</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)051378167</subfield><subfield code="x">1353-3452</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:24</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2017</subfield><subfield code="g">number:5</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1603-1610</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-CHE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-MAT</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TGE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">24</subfield><subfield code="j">2017</subfield><subfield code="e">5</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield><subfield code="h">1603-1610</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.398038 |