Order:
  1.  5
    Establishing Sensible and Practical Guidelines for Desk Rejections.Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Aceil Al-Khatib, Vedran Katavić & Helmar Bornemann-Cimenti - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1347-1365.
    Publishing has become, in several respects, more challenging in recent years. Academics are faced with evolving ethics that appear to be more stringent in a bid to reduce scientific fraud, the emergence of science watchdogs that are now scrutinizing the published literature with critical eyes to hold academics, editors and publishers more accountable, and a barrage of checks and balances that are required between when a paper is submitted and eventually accepted, to ensure quality control. Scientists are often under increasing (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  2.  26
    Perpetuation of Retracted Publications Using the Example of the Scott S. Reuben Case: Incidences, Reasons and Possible Improvements.Helmar Bornemann-Cimenti, Istvan S. Szilagyi & Andreas Sandner-Kiesling - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (4):1063-1072.
    In 2009, Scott S. Reuben was convicted of fabricating data, which lead to 25 of his publications being retracted. Although it is clear that the perpetuation of retracted articles negatively effects the appraisal of evidence, the extent to which retracted literature is cited had not previously been investigated. In this study, to better understand the perpetuation of discredited research, we examine the number of citations of Reuben’s articles within 5 years of their retraction. Citations of Reuben’s retracted articles were assessed (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  3. Establishing Sensible and Practical Guidelines for Desk Rejections.Helmar Bornemann-Cimenti, Vedran Katavić, Aceil Al-Khatib & Jaime Teixeira da Silva - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1347-1365.
    Publishing has become, in several respects, more challenging in recent years. Academics are faced with evolving ethics that appear to be more stringent in a bid to reduce scientific fraud, the emergence of science watchdogs that are now scrutinizing the published literature with critical eyes to hold academics, editors and publishers more accountable, and a barrage of checks and balances that are required between when a paper is submitted and eventually accepted, to ensure quality control. Scientists are often under increasing (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation