| Title |
The false academy: predatory publishing in science and bioethics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11019-016-9740-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefan Eriksson, Gert Helgesson |
| Abstract |
This paper describes and discusses the phenomenon 'predatory publishing', in relation to both academic journals and books, and suggests a list of characteristics by which to identify predatory journals. It also raises the question whether traditional publishing houses have accompanied rogue publishers upon this path. It is noted that bioethics as a discipline does not stand unaffected by this trend. Towards the end of the paper it is discussed what can and should be done to eliminate or reduce the effects of this development. The paper concludes that predatory publishing is a growing phenomenon that has the potential to greatly affect both bioethics and science at large. Publishing papers and books for profit, without any genuine concern for content, but with the pretence of applying authentic academic procedures of critical scrutiny, brings about a worrying erosion of trust in scientific publishing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 79 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 13% |
| Sweden | 6 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 8% |
| Spain | 4 | 5% |
| Canada | 3 | 4% |
| Fiji | 3 | 4% |
| France | 3 | 4% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 30 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 56 | 71% |
| Scientists | 17 | 22% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 5% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 241 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 238 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 40 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 27 | 11% |
| Librarian | 25 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 7% |
| Other | 64 | 27% |
| Unknown | 33 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 29 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 15 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 6% |
| Other | 92 | 38% |
| Unknown | 46 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 111. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 February 2024.
All research outputs
#384,274
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#7
of 623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,291
of 328,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
#1
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 623 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,799 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.