While that may be true ... isn't most of the TA fraud in the medical field ... which occurs because long range studies can't reasonably be reproducable. I would suggest that publication growing at an exponendial rate, that goes far beyond what can be professionally peer-reviewed, is almost by definition problematic.
Dana L. Roth Millikan Library / Caltech 1-32 1200 E. California Blvd. Pasadena, CA 91125 626-395-6423 fax 626-792-7540 dzr...@library.caltech.edu http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm ________________________________________ From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of C Oppenheim [c.oppenh...@lboro.ac.uk] Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 7:45 AM To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Facing up to fraud - China's exponential research growth could fuel fraud And don't forget the all too numerous instances of fraud which involved hoodwinking "professional peer reviewers" in the USA, UK, etc. and involved toll access journals. Of course high quality peer reviewing is important, but such refereeing occurs in OA just as much as in TA. Charles Professor Charles Oppenheim Department of Information Science Loughborough University Loughborough Leics LE11 3TU e mail c.oppenh...@lboro.ac.uk -----Original Message----- From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org] On Behalf Of Leslie Carr Sent: 19 February 2010 10:13 To: american-scientist-open-access-fo...@listserver.sigmaxi.org Subject: Re: Facing up to fraud - China's exponential research growth could fuel fraud On 19 Feb 2010, at 05:00, Dana Roth wrote: > The January 25 issue of Chemistry & Industry (issue 2, 2010) has a short > article on research fraud which includes a sidebar on the situation in China > (see below). This suggests that, contrary to Heather Morrison's suggestion, > scholar led open access publishing is not a viable solution. Without a cadre > of truly professional peer-reviewers, publication in Chinese journals will > become increasingly suspect. I draw the reverse conclusion. The frauds were discovered precisely because the already-peer-reviewed-material was available in an open access form for subsequent analysis. See the IUCR editorial http://journals.iucr.org/e/issues/2010/01/00/me0406/ , and the 2004 presentation to the BCA "Crystal Structure EPrints: Publication @ Source Through the Open Archive Initiative" ( http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/1633/ ) -- Les Carr
