How the “publish or perish” mentality is fueling scientific retractions
Image: Getty
Scientific journals worldwide are increasingly running into a similar problem: some of the papers they’ve published have significant issues with their accuracy or integrity, leading to a growing number of retractions in recent years.
By the numbers: Scientific publications have issued 39,000+ retractions over the past decade, with that figure growing by ~23% every year, according to the latest data from Retraction Watch. In 2023 alone, 10,000+ research papers were retracted globally.
- One of the most egregious examples is New Jersey-based publisher Wiley, which announced the closure of 19 scientific journals in May following the retraction of 11,300+ papers from those publications over the previous two years.
Analysts say the current system incentivizes such behavior. Scientists worldwide are often required to publish regularly in peer-reviewed journals to win grants or earn promotions. The constant pressure to generate research has contributed to a “publish or perish” environment, in which some scientists are motivated to cheat the system.
- The main workaround is the use of “paper mills,” which offer to list a scientist as an author on a fabricated paper in exchange for money. The mill submits the fabricated work to scientific journals, typically targeting publishers with less-thorough review processes.
- On the publishing side, scientific journals typically charge fees ranging from $100-$10,000 per study, which incentivizes some publications to ignore fabricated submissions.
Bottom line: Research flagged as fraudulent represents a tiny percentage of the 2+ million scientific papers published each year. But its growing presence could threaten the legitimacy of the ~$30 billion/year academic publishing industry, and harm the public perception of science as a whole.
📊 Flash poll: How would you best describe your personal confidence in the scientific community?
See a 360° view of what media pundits are saying →
Sprinkles from the Left
- Some commentators argue that the proliferation of paper mills has seeped so deeply into the scientific community that combating the problem is now the responsibility of funding agents, who must refuse badly reviewed journals and only promote journals known for rigorous peer review.
- Others contend that the recent spike in retractions of fraudulent papers is due to the fact that major publishers’ business models make them susceptible to paper mills, and has likely been a problem for a while before sleuthing by scientific volunteers uncovered the recent trend.
- “Fake Scientific Studies Are a Problem That’s Getting Harder to Solve.” –F.D. Flam, Bloomberg
- “There’s far more scientific fraud than anyone wants to admit” –Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus, The Guardian
- “Mistakes and misconduct in science are not synonymous; there are remedies for both” –David A. Brenner, San Diego Union-Tribune
Sprinkles from the Right
- Some commentators argue that the recent spike in scientific retractions reveals that the peer review process is susceptible to missing large errors or fraud, and argue journals should revamp their study verification systems to catch fake papers.
- Others contend that the US can restore lost confidence in its medical and scientific institutions by removing the cloak of secrecy surrounding the funding of science, and demanding more accountability from scientific journals.
- “What’s Wrong With Peer Review?” –Nidhi Subbaraman, WSJ
- “New priorities in U.S. health and science policy: Autonomy and accountability” –Dr. Scott W. Atlas, Washington Examiner
- “Why We Don’t Trust Science Anymore” –WSJ Future View
Share this!
Recent Discussion stories
Discussion
| September 30, 2024Younger men and women aren’t seeing eye to eye
♂️♀️ Over the past decade, an ideological gap has opened up between young men and women in America, with the divide spreading across many key areas of life.
Discussion
| September 27, 2024You voted in the 2024 election. What happens next?
🗳️ The 2024 election officially kicked off this month – but the real work begins after polls close on Nov. 5, when election officials in all 50 states start counting up the ballots.
Discussion
| September 25, 2024America’s growing YIMBY movement aims to boost affordable housing
🏘️ A growing number of Americans are joining the “yes, in my backyard” (YIMBY) movement, which aims to boost affordable housing by changing regulations around single-family homes.
You've made it this far...
Let's make our relationship official, no 💍 or elaborate proposal required. Learn and stay entertained, for free.👇
All of our news is 100% free and you can unsubscribe anytime; the quiz takes ~10 seconds to complete