"Studies"...Reader Beware!

[Longboard]

"To find out just how common predatory publishing is, Science contributor John Bohannon sent a deliberately faked research article 305 times to online journals. More than half the journals that supposedly reviewed the fake paper accepted it."This sting operation," Bohannan writes, reveals "the contours of an emerging Wild West in academic publishing."'
http://kazu.org/post/some-online-journals-will-publish-fake-science-fee

 

[Sid]

The scientists who read and use these journals know the difference between major journals in their field and the bogus ones, similar to how everyone is familiar with the NYT or WSJ. The problem would be laypeople or journalists, but those people usually only have a superifical understanding anyway. If they are knowledgeable, then they are also able to differentiate between quality vs. bogus. There are cases where articles are well written and published in quality journals, but the data is altered. In this case, it's important for reviewers to have access to the primary data.

 

[Longboard]

Yeah, this one is from eight years ago:
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

 

[Sid]

Sensational title, but full of things that knowledgeable scientific readers already know about.

Most news articles are fluff, too. Discerning readers can tell the important articles from the filler.

imho, that article was a bit of scientific filler...

Part of the problem...
http://www.economist.com/node/17723223

 

[Longboard]

Part of the problem...
http://www.economist.com/node/17723223

Exactly.