English – The Conversation | Plagiarised research passed automated tests, and I detected it – but only because it copied my work by Carolyn Heward, Senior lecturer, Clinical Psychology, James Cook University

Earlier this year, I published a paper on the ethics of researching military populations.

The core argument was straightforward: the standard rules researchers follow to protect participants – for example, informed consent and voluntary participation – don’t work the same in an institution built on hierarchy and obedience.

A soldier can, as protected by ethics, say no to participating in research. But when their commanding officer has nominated them, the practical reality of saying no is very different from the legal right to do so. My paper explored the tension between ethical rights and lived reality.

From factual errors to reproduced memos

A lucky catch

A deeper concern

Read more: https://theconversation.com/plagiarised-research-passed-automated-tests-and-i-detected-it-but-only-because-it-copied-my-work-279553

#defencementalhealth #peerreview #academicpublishing #socialsciences

Plagiarised research passed automated tests, and I detected it – but only because it copied my work

The safeguards in place to protect research integrity are not keeping pace with the tools that can be used to circumvent them.

The Conversation
I dag har jag överträffat mig själv. #juridik #medicin #peerreview

Hi academic friends,

I’ve just received an invitation to review a paper for the journal PeerJ https://peerj.com/

Do you have any experience with this journal/publisher?
It has an impact factor and is indexed in the usual databases. It seems to have even won some awards. I couldn’t find it on any lists of predatory journals.

But… I hadn’t heard of it before, and some aspects feel a bit suspicious to me.
Any experiences? Thanks!

#academicchatter #peerreview #academia

PeerJ - Peer-Reviewed Open Access Journals, Trusted by Researchers

Trusted by researchers, committed to open. PeerJ delivers open-access publishing with transparent peer review across two STM and computer science journals.

Interesting pointer from a #JEDI thread:
Description of a process to integrate evaluation of computational reproducibility into #PeerReview:
https://f1000research.com/articles/10-253/v2

I also like the ethos and wonder whether #PeerReview in general could learn from this?

1. Codecheckers record but don’t investigate or fix.
2. Communication between humans is key
3. Credit is given to codecheckers.
4. Computational workflows must be auditable.
5. Open by default and transitional by disposition.

#NightshiftEditor

F1000Research Article: CODECHECK: an Open Science initiative for the independent execution of computations underlying research articles during peer review to improve reproducibility.

Read the latest article version by Daniel Nüst, Stephen J. Eglen, at F1000Research.

I’m pleased to share my recent peer-review activity with Elsevier for Q1 2026.

🔬 Review History Highlights:
• 4 reviews completed
• 3 international journals
• Contributions to:
– Preventive Veterinary Medicine
– The Veterinary Journal
– Virology

I look forward to continuing to support the scientific community through rigorous, constructive, and timely reviews.

#PeerReview #ScientificResearch #VeterinaryMedicine #Virology #Elsevier #AcademicService

Our new 📄 in Current Alzheimer Research looks at a strange, and worrying, phenomenon in scientific writing: tortured phrases. Instead of blood-brain barrier, some papers use bizarre alternatives like blood-brain obstruction or blood-cerebrum boundary.

 https://doi.org/10.2174/0115672050460224260206052444

These are not just language errors, they can signal deeper issues such as weak #PeerReview or even #PaperMills.

#OpenScience #ResearchIntegrity #Bibliometrics #Neuroethics #AcademicPublishing

I just learned about ORE, thanks to Khrys'presso.

I'm really curious about open peer review and more generally about their publishing model.

[ I also wish such a platform was built around a distributed model like ActivityPub. ]

#DiamondOA #PeerReview

Open Research Europe | Powered by CERN

Open Research Europe (ORE) - High-quality, reliable, and efficient open access publishing for European research.

Six #ASAPbio fellows asked four #LLMs to describe the strengths and weaknesses of #preprints. Here are the results.
https://asapbio.org/interim-findings-from-an-investigation-into-llm-responses-about-preprints-a-2025-asapbio-fellows-project/

The same fellows asked the same LLMs to ingest six preprints and their #PeerReviewed counterparts, and compare them for quality and rigor. Good question. But they've not yet analyzed the data and will presumably report soon.

PS: I'm interested in a related question. When LLMs answer research questions, do they treat on-topic preprints and on-topic postprints (peer-reviewed articles) as equivalent in weight or credibility? If not, how exactly do they take any differences into account?

#AI #PeerReview #ScholComm

Interim Findings From An Investigation Into LLM Responses About Preprints: A 2025 ASAPbio Fellows Project – ASAPbio

Contributors: Felipe Del Valle Batalla, Barakat Mohazab, Akanksha Gupta, Kendra Parson, Emiliya Taskova

PL - ASAPbio
I genuinely believe the structural solution to the paper crisis affecting #PeerReview is a reimagining of what finished & published science looks like. In the diluted system we have now, peer review cannot systematically perform to task. We need a system that doesn't require it, but can still use it

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:tbqqvyv6pjjww44glrmycaxl/post/3midei2kcic2x
Wissenschaft in der heutigen Zeit

Nicht die Wissenschaft ist einseitig geworden, sondern die Berichterstattung darüber Betrachtet man jedoch die Fülle an Fachinformationen etwa im Internet...