Librarian finds ‘preposterous number’ of fake references in paper from Springer Nature journal
Librarian finds ‘preposterous number’ of fake references in paper from Springer Nature journal
the fact that following up about hallucinated references was met with a second list of hallucinated references is just insulting, imo.
surely needing to go through everything with a fine-toothed comb to make sure that a) a source hasn’t been hallucinated and that b) cited sources actually say what is claimed, is more time-consuming than just doing the research & citations manually?
“This is more complex than it may at first appear, as references can be detailed by authors in a variety of different ways, often do not include DOIs, and simple tools to identify hallucinated references can produce false positives,” Graf told us by email.
It’s not complex when you have a fucking style manual which specifies exactly how you detail references so you don’t have this kind of problem.
It’s not complex when you have a fucking style manual which specifies exactly how you detail references so you don’t have this kind of problem.
About that, it’s kinda complicated
The USA has several: MLA, APA, Imrad, etc but none of them explicitly require control numbers or serial numbers from publications.
Meanwhile, I knew a guy in the UK who did a dissertation on market economies and they literally did not specify any kind of format for him at all.