ChatGPT ignores retractions of scientific papers — my latest for @cenmag.bsky.social:
cen.acs.org/policy/publi...
@mikethelwall.bsky.social, @wisewoman.bsky.social
I’m afraid I’m moving quickly to the retina scan and fingerprint argument. This has been a challenge in publishing for a while and is rapidly increasing in scale. We need some real identity verification in this industry
I’ll check in with the team first thing tomorrow.
When the Scoreboard Becomes the Game, It’s Time to Recalibrate Research Metrics scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2025/09/11/g...
Poster for The Shadow Scholars by Eloise King. Shows two men at laptops at night with city lights behind. Lists UK cinema screenings Sept–Oct, including Oxford, London, Leeds, with some Q&A events.
There are lots of UK showings of the excellent The Shadow Scholars documentary on #contractcheating coming up, some with Q&As with director Eloise King and Professor Patricia Kingori. Image from Instagram.
We’ll keep you updated - please do you use our appeal process if you'd like the article reconsidered, the team are aware and ready to process your request. publishingsupport.iopscience.iop.org/questions/ap...
Do shout if I can be of any further help. 2/2
Hi Andy, I'm the Head of Peer Review and Research Integrity at @ioppublishing.bsky.social. Firstly I'm so sorry this has happened to you, we absolutely should have caught it. We’re taking this incredibly seriously and have started a thorough investigation. 1/2
My conclusion from this is that preprint servers (and journals!) are entering a new phase of cat and mouse trying to contain AI slop (n.b., not mundane AI use, but nonsense generation). Peer review as a filter scarcely does better to ID this stuff. We need new & better tools to ID trustworthy works.
This deluge is rapidly adding to costs for everyone. If it requires a human to kick it out there’s a cost involved, and rejection rates are soaring. We are going to have to get comfortable with more automation to filter slop out if we want to keep costs down.
Superb afternoon watching The Railway Children @bradford2025.co.uk, get a ticket if you can! Great staging, superb cast and crew - and a train!
I love this, so needed and would love to implement. A lot of the time as Publishers we don’t know the intent behind the problem, do you have any advice how we should handle categorizing when we know the error but don’t know the intent?
So sad to hear about the passing of Allen Ahlberg. I grew up adoring his books and now my children enjoy them too. A true great of children’s literature.
Wonder how many institutions subscribe to @pubpeer.com
As a Publisher RIO I found myself tending to agree with the sleuth view. Institutions are improving but it’s very slow progress, if we get a response at all it’s often “not our problem” vibes.
Support your society publishers!
For years we’ve encouraged authors to be transparent about the contributions that go into each paper. We’ve now got full #CRediT functionality so it’s now recorded in the metadata as well any full text version, well done @ioppublishing.bsky.social team! www.universityworldnews.com/post-mobile....
Why do we peer review?
In a new paper, we establish a self-interested reason: learning.
With a quasi-experimental design applied to admin data from 55 journals, we show reviewing a paper doubles chances of citing it in future work!
Now I look closer, clearly the email and lack of ability to search gives it away
First one (left), but only because I think I recognize the Elsevier font
So proud to work with a society publisher. We give every penny of profit to the Institute of Physics who do phenomenal work supporting physicists in research and practice. This model enables the system to be circular, with investment right back into the community we serve.
Some fantastic advice for researchers in here, including how/where to store image data and keeping electronic lab notebooks
What does citation manipulation look like and how has it changed with the growth of paper mills?
A summary of COPE’s recent Citation Manipulation Lightning Talk and discussion is now available.
Add your comments discussion:
ow.ly/ZacF50W2rVS
#CitationManipulation
And even better, have an ORCID profile that’s open not private, and populated with your institution history, variants of your name you’ve been published under, and some publications to help with this kind of disambiguation.
Some Publishers update the article title in their metadata which would look like your first example. It’s recommended best practice to do this now but only for the last year or two. www.niso.org/publications...
Terminating the grants to study misinformation is “an overt act of censoring and preventing accountability,” says Stephen Lewandowsky, a misinformation researcher at the University of Bristol. “Who other than a liar would cancel misinformation research?”
🧪
www.science.org/content/arti...
My brother and his friends used to say I looked like “a bulldog chewing a wasp”. SO MEAN
Crossref is seeking proposals for a website information architecture review. We encourage submissions by May 15, 2025. https://doi.org/10.64000/058mr-k3s56
Important to remember
www.icmje.org/recommendati...
Science isn't a belief. It's the GPS in the fog, the seatbelt on the rollercoaster, the friend who tells you your fly is down. Undermining it isn’t edgy—it’s like replacing your smoke alarm with a lava lamp. 🧪🔬🔥 We need brains, not vibes. #SaveScience
