Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Scholarly Open Access
Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Gerald Dorey

0
0

A lttle tricky if the authors freely decided to publish first in the Science Publications journal as implied. If so, the Springer journal has little claim and should retract; if not, it is theft with all that implies. The law – and ethics – don’t bow to impact factors.


Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by F. Pessoa

0
0

Surley the later publication should go?

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Claudia Holland

0
0

I agree with Gerald. The authors should not be allowed a choice. They knew what they were doing was unethical. The retraction should be by Springer.

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Jeffrey Beall

0
0

Thank you for this excellent discussion. I did not look at the situation from the perspective of retracting the first-published article, but I think the points being made in favor of this are very good ones.

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Claudia Holland

0
0

I agree. The authors should not be allowed to choose which publication should be retracted. Submission of the paper to another journal, after the fact, was unethical. Springer should retract AND be circumspect regarding subsequent submissions from Pruksathorn and Vitidsant.

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Robin Hood

0
0

In my opinion, all the options are incorrect. If indeed the authors are guilty of double submission, then BOTH publishers have the moral responsibility of removing the papers. Springer only thinks about its profits. Don’t be fooled into thinking that this is some sort of a moral issue. Springer and other main-stream publishers’ moral = the US$. So, not only should the authors be criticised, but so should the “moral” standing of Springer.

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Guria

0
0

You hit the nail on the head :)

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Guido

0
0

I don’t agree with this reasoning. The aim of retractions should be to keep the academic literature clean of fraudulent or duplicated papers, not to punish unethical authors (or publishers). If the paper itself contributes new insights to the academic literature, one version ought to remain.


Comment on Research by Jeorge Lewis

0
0

Plz consider the evaluation of the journal “International Journal of Energy & Technology”
http://www.journal-enertech.eu/
According to your criteria along with my own experience, it is far more than a predatory

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Matt Hodgkinson

0
0

1. Charging for retraction is indeed unethical. Is the Editor-in-Chief, Mohammad Masoum, aware of this practice? http://ece.curtin.edu.au/people/m_masoum.cfm If he is and approves of it, you should forward details of this case to his institution.

2. Is the authors’ institution, Chulalongkorn University, aware of this case, and are they involved in the decision to retract? They should be, and they should have conducted an investigation.

3. As others have said, the article published second will need to be retracted. The Springer article appears to have been published 4 months subsequently.

The COPE flowchart for redundant publication is here: http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/01B_Redundant_Published.pdf

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by A Khan

0
0

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Martin

0
0

It is obviously unethical for an author to submit the same paper to two journals. What is much more worrisome is that Springer publishes a paper that has already been published in another journal. If it was an honest mistake, they should have immediately retracted the paper, without consultation with the authors. Not doing so is very unethical. The fact that Science Publications charges a retraction fee is understandable. A retracted paper tarnishes the reputation of a journal, and it is also work involved. If I were them, I would have refused to retract the paper and demand that Springer retract their copy.

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by R V Krishnakumar

0
0

Inadequate literature survey may lead to genuine situations like this. But, then the Editors are supposed to be more smarter than the authors. So, I agree with Guido. The later one should go without anyone getting blamed. Also, justice is not delivered like hitting the nail on its head.

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by naser

0
0

I see the authors published their paper first in American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences and then by Springer. Therefore, we must blame Authors the most since they submit two paper almost at the same time. Quite frankly, Springer must retract the paper and not the first one since they did not do any thing wrong.

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Nils

0
0

This is not the issue. Any journal can be the victim of unethical scientists, though a serious peer review process can help limiting the risk of this to happen. However, a serious journal should have a clearly defined policy on how to handle retractions and cases of plagiarism or duplication. Most predatory OA publishers appear not to have such a policy.


Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Per sopravvissuti al calendario » Ocasapiens - Blog - Repubblica.it

0
0

[...] degli editori scientifici che pubblicano qualunque bufala, basta pagare. In un anno sono passati da 23 a 243 per via del boom e della sua [...]

Comment on Publishing Pseudo-Science by Per sopravvissuti al calendario » Ocasapiens - Blog - Repubblica.it

0
0

[...] la concorrenza, il prezzo cala insieme alla qualità. Esempio 64,99 dollari soltanto per far uscire sull’International Journal of Science and Technology questa [...]

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by Per sopravvissuti al calendario » Ocasapiens - Blog - Repubblica.it

0
0

[...] certi editori predoni hanno scoperto una nuova fonte di reddito: 650 dollari per ritrattare una [...]

Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Peter Nonacs

0
0

I have a specific comment/question about Ashdin Publishing on the predatory list. Recently we published an article in their Journal of Evolutionary Medicine. The editorial board has real people, who are actually well known in the field. Our paper was rigorously reviewed. And the charges were $300 – which is much more reasonable than the supposedly non-predatory PLoS group. In short our experience was in every way comparable or better than many an established journal. Now Ashdin has multiple new journals and I certainly cannot vouch for all. But is it possible that a publisher can put out both predatory and reputable journals at the same time? And if a publisher ever makes your list, what can they do, or what info has to come in to get off of it?

Comment on Publisher Charges Authors for Retractions by George

0
0

Very interesting discussion. Is a bogus journal a real academic journal? how if the reason why the authors retracted their paper is because they just aware if the first journal is a bogus journal?

Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images