It seems that editors still enjoy an almost absolute power in deciding "what gets published" and are barely accountable. The rejection of two "Letters to the Editor" submitted by myself to different journals leads me to expose here the editors' confidentiality breach inherent to improperly sharing unpublished manuscripts with the challenged authors. Although the scientific relevance of the issues raised ere is virtually null, these experiences are consistent with the view that full peer review starts only after publication, highlight certain editorial malpractices, and stress that we all should promote scientific integrity. Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
This is a short letter on how the peer review process of many journals is being abused by some sham ...
At Proceedings of the Royal Society A, we are always concerned and vigilant about publication malpra...
Peer review continues to be upheld as the best way to evaluate academic research ahead of publicatio...
There is growing awareness that issues that fall under the so-called editorial prerogative and hence...
In January this year, we were confronted with a case of plagiarism. One paper that had been submitte...
‘Some editors are failed writers, but so are most writers.’ TS Eliot (1888–1965) Have you ever wonde...
Allegations of ethical misbehavior on the part of scientific authors are nothing new.1 In some insta...
Though scientific misconduct perpetrated by authors has received much press, little attention has be...
In traditional publishing, authors are usually held accountable by editors. Rarely, however, are edi...
<div><p>Peer review is the gold standard for scientific communication, but its ability to guarantee ...
LETTER: To the Editor, In recent years, many questionable journals have appeared and their num...
LETTER: To the Editor, In recent years, many questionable journals have appeared and their num...
LETTER: To the Editor, In recent years, many questionable journals have appeared and their num...
Peer review is the gold standard for scientific communication, but its ability to guarantee the qual...
Abstract—After a short overview of arguments pro and contra peer reviews, examples of gross misjudge...
This is a short letter on how the peer review process of many journals is being abused by some sham ...
At Proceedings of the Royal Society A, we are always concerned and vigilant about publication malpra...
Peer review continues to be upheld as the best way to evaluate academic research ahead of publicatio...
There is growing awareness that issues that fall under the so-called editorial prerogative and hence...
In January this year, we were confronted with a case of plagiarism. One paper that had been submitte...
‘Some editors are failed writers, but so are most writers.’ TS Eliot (1888–1965) Have you ever wonde...
Allegations of ethical misbehavior on the part of scientific authors are nothing new.1 In some insta...
Though scientific misconduct perpetrated by authors has received much press, little attention has be...
In traditional publishing, authors are usually held accountable by editors. Rarely, however, are edi...
<div><p>Peer review is the gold standard for scientific communication, but its ability to guarantee ...
LETTER: To the Editor, In recent years, many questionable journals have appeared and their num...
LETTER: To the Editor, In recent years, many questionable journals have appeared and their num...
LETTER: To the Editor, In recent years, many questionable journals have appeared and their num...
Peer review is the gold standard for scientific communication, but its ability to guarantee the qual...
Abstract—After a short overview of arguments pro and contra peer reviews, examples of gross misjudge...
This is a short letter on how the peer review process of many journals is being abused by some sham ...
At Proceedings of the Royal Society A, we are always concerned and vigilant about publication malpra...
Peer review continues to be upheld as the best way to evaluate academic research ahead of publicatio...