fake reviews lol

Comments

• BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  As someone who’s had a paper sitting with a journal since August I can understand the motivation.

  source
• somethingp@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  This is crazy. I wonder what the context was for making up reviewers. Because it sounds like the paper would’ve maybe still been published without the fake reviewers

  source

  • Adalast@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It was published, hence the first word being “Post-publication”. I think the issue for the retraction is that if 4 or the reviewers were lying about their identies then the voracity of their assessments is strongly in question. As shitty as the modern peer review process is, its essence is vital for the progress of modern science.

    source