{"title":"COPE Flowcharts and infographics – Fabricated data in a submitted manuscript.","authors":"A. Editorial","doi":"10.24069/sep-21-15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24069/sep-21-15","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>.</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":256387,"journal":{"name":"Science Editor and Publisher","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115984410","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article provides a short introduction to ORCID and discusses the value of ORCID to researchers, publishers and editors, and research institutions. Here we provide some data about current rates of ORCID adoption around the world and we cover how our different APIs can be used with the ORCID/ OJS plugin, and outline some concrete steps that both ORCID members and non-members can take to enable the ORCID/OJS plugins.
{"title":"ORCID and its configuring with OJS to accurately credit researchers for their work","authors":"Sh. Sadler","doi":"10.24069/sep-21-05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24069/sep-21-05","url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a short introduction to ORCID and discusses the value of ORCID to researchers, publishers and editors, and research institutions. Here we provide some data about current rates of ORCID adoption around the world and we cover how our different APIs can be used with the ORCID/ OJS plugin, and outline some concrete steps that both ORCID members and non-members can take to enable the ORCID/OJS plugins. ","PeriodicalId":256387,"journal":{"name":"Science Editor and Publisher","volume":"234 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122243432","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"COPE Flowcharts and infographics – Peer review manipulation suspected during the peer review process","authors":"A. Editorial","doi":"10.24069/sep-21-08","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24069/sep-21-08","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>.</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":256387,"journal":{"name":"Science Editor and Publisher","volume":"1097 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116043973","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"COPE Flowcharts and infographics – Plagiarism in a published article","authors":"A. Editorial","doi":"10.24069/sep-21-14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24069/sep-21-14","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>.</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":256387,"journal":{"name":"Science Editor and Publisher","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125500669","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"COPE Flowcharts and infographics – Fabricated data in a published article","authors":"A. Editorial","doi":"10.24069/sep-21-16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24069/sep-21-16","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>.</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":256387,"journal":{"name":"Science Editor and Publisher","volume":"209 12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122548809","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Integration of Russian science into the world’s scientific community is an important task for the government, universities, research organizations, and researchers. The ORCID identifier (iD) is an efficient tool for promoting researchers and their works, building researchers’ personal brands and enhancing their reputation in the scientific community, as well as attributing authorship. Modern journals are increasingly requiring their contributors to provide an ORCID iD as a mandatory element of the author’s information. Russian researchers, possibly due to the low awareness about the benefits of ORCID, make some typical mistakes when registering and completing their ORCID records. This article provides a brief analysis of such mistakes and shows 1) how to correctly present a researcher’s published (preferred) name and how to indicate other names the researcher is known by; 2) what visibility modes ORCID provides to its users; 3) what data can be added to a researcher’s ORCID iD for improved discoverability and recognition. An example of a published article with a wrong ORCID iD is presented; all the resulting negative outcomes for the journal are discussed. The conclusion is made about the need to raise the awareness among the research community about the importance of full and correct ORCID profiles. Editors of scientific journals should ensure that the authors’ ORCID records are filled out correctly.
{"title":"Typical mistakes by Russian researchers when registering and completing their ORCID records: Analysis of real cases","authors":"T. A. Loskutova","doi":"10.24069/sep-21-11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24069/sep-21-11","url":null,"abstract":"Integration of Russian science into the world’s scientific community is an important task for the government, universities, research organizations, and researchers. The ORCID identifier (iD) is an efficient tool for promoting researchers and their works, building researchers’ personal brands and enhancing their reputation in the scientific community, as well as attributing authorship. Modern journals are increasingly requiring their contributors to provide an ORCID iD as a mandatory element of the author’s information. Russian researchers, possibly due to the low awareness about the benefits of ORCID, make some typical mistakes when registering and completing their ORCID records. This article provides a brief analysis of such mistakes and shows 1) how to correctly present a researcher’s published (preferred) name and how to indicate other names the researcher is known by; 2) what visibility modes ORCID provides to its users; 3) what data can be added to a researcher’s ORCID iD for improved discoverability and recognition. An example of a published article with a wrong ORCID iD is presented; all the resulting negative outcomes for the journal are discussed. The conclusion is made about the need to raise the awareness among the research community about the importance of full and correct ORCID profiles. Editors of scientific journals should ensure that the authors’ ORCID records are filled out correctly.","PeriodicalId":256387,"journal":{"name":"Science Editor and Publisher","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131995761","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"COPE Flowcharts and infographics – How to recognise potential manipulation of the peer review process","authors":"A. Editorial","doi":"10.24069/sep-21-07","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24069/sep-21-07","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>.</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":256387,"journal":{"name":"Science Editor and Publisher","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115955042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"COPE Flowcharts and infographics – How to recognise potential authorship problems","authors":"A. Editorial","doi":"10.24069/sep-21-06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24069/sep-21-06","url":null,"abstract":"<jats:p>.</jats:p>","PeriodicalId":256387,"journal":{"name":"Science Editor and Publisher","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121149700","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Retraction is one of the ways to filter low-quality academic publications. Over the last decade, the number of retracted articles from journals has been steadily growing around the world. Information about such articles can be found both on the websites of the retracting journals and in the databases that index these journals. In 2010, two doctors from the United States, Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus, created an Internet resource – Retraction Watch (RW), which concentrates information obtained as a result of investigations of ethical misconduct leading to retraction of articles. These investigations are conducted by the RW founders themselves, as well as by volunteers. Currently, RW contains information on over 24,000 retractions. The main violations include serious errors in methodology and calculations that lead to incorrect conclusions, manipulation of figures and data, plagiarism and self-citation, duplication of publications, etc. In its posts, RW considers unintentional mistakes, as well as deliberate fraud in order to obtain a position, degree or other benefit. Retractions can result in the withdrawal of academic degrees, dismissal from work, demotion, loss of authority among colleagues. RW posts are released daily and a cumulative RW issue – at the end of each week. The owners of the resource, having no outside funding, offer to subscribe to a paid resource or provide sponsorship assistance to those interested in maintaining and developing it. However, the resource is publicly available, and everyone can subscribe to mailing lists for free. Recent issues have focused on non-peerreviewed articles about COVID-19 that report erroneous scientific findings with possible serious implications for important decisions. In addition, Retraction Watch accumulates information on academic ethics from other sources. This article aims to describe a variety of ethical violations leading to retraction of articles and the consequences of retractions based on RW data. The sample of posts was drawn mainly from the 2021 RW issues.
{"title":"Retraction Watch: A tool for informing academia about ethical violations in publications","authors":"E. A. Balyakina","doi":"10.24069/sep-21-12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.24069/sep-21-12","url":null,"abstract":"Retraction is one of the ways to filter low-quality academic publications. Over the last decade, the number of retracted articles from journals has been steadily growing around the world. Information about such articles can be found both on the websites of the retracting journals and in the databases that index these journals. In 2010, two doctors from the United States, Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus, created an Internet resource – Retraction Watch (RW), which concentrates information obtained as a result of investigations of ethical misconduct leading to retraction of articles. These investigations are conducted by the RW founders themselves, as well as by volunteers. Currently, RW contains information on over 24,000 retractions. The main violations include serious errors in methodology and calculations that lead to incorrect conclusions, manipulation of figures and data, plagiarism and self-citation, duplication of publications, etc. In its posts, RW considers unintentional mistakes, as well as deliberate fraud in order to obtain a position, degree or other benefit. Retractions can result in the withdrawal of academic degrees, dismissal from work, demotion, loss of authority among colleagues. RW posts are released daily and a cumulative RW issue – at the end of each week. The owners of the resource, having no outside funding, offer to subscribe to a paid resource or provide sponsorship assistance to those interested in maintaining and developing it. However, the resource is publicly available, and everyone can subscribe to mailing lists for free. Recent issues have focused on non-peerreviewed articles about COVID-19 that report erroneous scientific findings with possible serious implications for important decisions. In addition, Retraction Watch accumulates information on academic ethics from other sources. This article aims to describe a variety of ethical violations leading to retraction of articles and the consequences of retractions based on RW data. The sample of posts was drawn mainly from the 2021 RW issues.","PeriodicalId":256387,"journal":{"name":"Science Editor and Publisher","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128999042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：