menu_open
Columnists Actual . Favourites . Archive
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close
Aa Aa Aa
- A +

Putting the peer-review process to the test 

9 6
13.02.2024

A recent article published in Nature highlights the overwhelming number of peer-reviewed research papers that were retracted in 2023. To some, this may appear to be a reason for concern with how scholarly research is being conducted, the legitimacy of the peer-review process and how research is being used to influence policy that impacts society.

Given that scientific findings may be reported in the media, journalists writing about research that eventually gets retracted is a problem. It gives a false perception that research is flawed, effectively throwing the “baby out with the bath water.”

But research errors by reputable researchers occur — this is a product of the discovery process. Given that research reputation is critical to preserve scientific integrity, which is necessary, for example, to gain and maintain research funding support, retractions occur anytime errors are published. The recent action by Dana-Farner Cancer Institute, retracting six studies, reflects the significance of such actions to uphold scientific integrity.

However, some researchers exploit the peer-review process to their advantage, incentivized to jump on this publication “Titanic” for personal gains.

As the Nature article notes, the preponderance of retractions — around 80 percent — were in journals owned by Hindawi. Many of these papers were also in journal issues classified as “special,” with guest editors that may not be........

© The Hill


Get it on Google Play