Close

Complete Captcha

• 7 months - 21 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 53 Goods vs 33 No Goods

1. Economist
   549f
   

   Predatory authors:

   "Predatory authors, where undeserving scientists impose themselves as coauthors on other people’s papers. All of these predatory activities serve the purpose of padding one’s CV, and the higher you rank, the more freedom you get to engage in predatory activities. Predatory authorships is a quite pervasive phenomenon, since probably every publishing academic can name some of their coauthors who never contributed anything of value to their paper."

   https://forbetterscience.com/2020/02/04/predatory-authors-by-wolfgang-dreybrodt/

   Also:

   Paper mill: what is it and why is it wrong?
   https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/paper-mill-what-is-it-and-why-is-it-wrong

   7 months ago # QUOTE 15 Jab 1 No Jab !

2. Economist
   08a9
   

   LOL

   7 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

3. Economist
   1d42
   

   Solo -> obscure B/C journal
   Attach prominent senior -> top field

   If this is predatory call me prey

   7 months ago # QUOTE 6 Jab 9 No Jab !

4. Economist
   7320
   

   Solo -> obscure B/C journal
   Attach prominent senior -> top field
   If this is predatory call me prey

   No, I better call you FRAUDSTER.

   7 months ago # QUOTE 11 Jab 1 No Jab !

5. Economist
   1d42
   

   Solo -> obscure B/C journal
   Attach prominent senior -> top field
   If this is predatory call me prey

   No, I better call you FRAUDSTER.

   Sorry you disappointed your advisor and he stopped returning your emails after your defense

   7 months ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 3 No Jab !

6. Economist
   fc57
   

   https://twitter.com/KhoaVuUmn/status/1365830324115095553

   7 months ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 0 No Jab !

7. Economist
   fc57
   

   Solo -> obscure B/C journal
   Attach prominent senior -> top field
   If this is predatory call me prey

   That said: Quality depends on the status of one of the "authors". In other words, quality depends on a signal rather than evaluation.

   Economics cannot evaluate quality without networks and status. Journal quality thus cannot be evaluated based on hard determinants. Voodoo rankings - I consider this acutually good news.

   7 months ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 7 No Jab !

8. Economist
   4177
   

   Solo -> obscure B/C journal
   Attach prominent senior -> top field
   If this is predatory call me prey

   That said: Quality depends on the status of one of the "authors". In other words, quality depends on a signal rather than evaluation.
   Economics cannot evaluate quality without networks and status. Journal quality thus cannot be evaluated based on hard determinants. Voodoo rankings - I consider this acutually good news.

   Appalling! And these fraudster have taken the profession by storm :-(

   7 months ago # QUOTE 4 Jab 0 No Jab !

9. Economist
   d849
   

   Some people highly overestimating the contribution to a paper. One important comment can be more valuable for the paper than 100 hours of RA work.

   7 months ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 7 No Jab !

10. Economist
    fc57
    

    Some people highly overestimating the contribution to a paper. One important comment can be more valuable for the paper than 100 hours of RA work.

    Indeed - but currently, the importance comments are wighted by "status" since we do not have any other hard determinants to evaluate impact.

    7 months ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 1 No Jab !

11. Economist
    4a65
    

    is this another schiraldi thread?

    7 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 1 No Jab !

12. Economist
    ac07
    

    Iftekhar Hasan is poster child of predatory author

    7 months ago # QUOTE 3 Jab 0 No Jab !

13. Economist
    0fc3
    

    bump

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

14. Economist
    0fc3
    

    https://scholar.google.si/citations?hl=en&user=Xr8oKZ4AAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

15. Economist
    e24b
    

    ^Holy cow. How is this possible at a US university?

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

16. Economist
    9f7c
    

    That’s what acknowledgements are for. I suggest you go back and read authorship criteria imposed by journals and scientific associations. HTH

    Some people highly overestimating the contribution to a paper. One important comment can be more valuable for the paper than 100 hours of RA work.

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

17. Economist
    d8c8
    

    let’s pay less attention to publications without actually reading them.

    6 months ago # QUOTE 4 Jab 0 No Jab !

18. Economist
    a333
    

    let’s pay less attention to publications without actually reading them.

    It’s so commonsensical that it’s embarrassing that nobody cares about the actual content of papers today. What daℳ№ profession.

    6 months ago # QUOTE 4 Jab 0 No Jab !

19. Economist
    fc57
    

    Actual contest reminder: your paper is not of general interest to the readers of our journal --> reject

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

20. Economist
    4c06
    

    Actual contest reminder: your paper is not of general interest to the readers of our journal --> reject

    But in actual fact, most people don't read papers for general interest. Journals aren't the daily news.

    4 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

Reply »