RT @NaudetFlorian: Followed by this massive survey in @PLOSBiology: https://t.co/Q5RbJOH377 :

RT @NaudetFlorian: Followed by this massive survey in @PLOSBiology: https://t.co/Q5RbJOH377 :

RT @NaudetFlorian: Followed by this massive survey in @PLOSBiology: https://t.co/Q5RbJOH377 :

Followed by this massive survey in @PLOSBiology: https://t.co/Q5RbJOH377 :

@giorapac @PLOSBiology @IoanaA_Cristea @dmoher @deevybee @Clara_Locher The answer is no😉. You can even have a look at the peer review process as it is openly available with @PLOSBiology. https://t.co/XlzMvftrxU

nepotismo @SebaDeBona @TimothyMSwartz @GleditschJason @lizardmanhuron @cannon_stefani

@KordingLab @bradpwyble @Raamana_ @NeuroPolarbear @atypical_me @tyrell_turing @andpru @neuralreckoning @R3RT0 @katjaQheuer @OHBM @IpNeuro That kind of behavior can already be picked out even in our fragmented, non-interoperable literature: https://t.co/9Ii

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

What not a surprise

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @PLOSBiology: Massive survey of >5k journals explores relationship between hyper-prolific authors & journal editorial teams, finding a s…

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @biblioGetafe: This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

This article identify journals that may show favoritism in accepting articles by specific authors https://t.co/yxJxAkIMvy

RT @PLOSBiology: Massive survey of >5k journals explores relationship between hyper-prolific authors & journal editorial teams, finding a s…

@djmeyers2 https://t.co/QD6YoGMss3

A quem interessar, segue o artigo publicado na PLOS Biology na íntegra... https://t.co/2EH8RN71Gk

Alongside the growing concerns regarding predatory journal growth, other questionable editorial practices have gained visibility recently. A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior https://t.co/yGwxFZ7tYL https://t.c

RT @Joaquin_Sevilla: El estudio de las malas prácticas en ciencia es ya un campo cientítico... con cosas muy especializadas, hay que estudi…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

siehe auch https://t.co/OL1P33rspz

"In most journals, publications are distributed across a large number of authors. Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications" https://t.

RT @Chauhanlab_ILS: Stop nepotism in Science. stop #nepotisminscience . Kudos to authors of this @PLOSBiology paper for very clearly bringi…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

Good to have something that’s always seemed so obvious backed up by the data.

RT @Chauhanlab_ILS: Stop nepotism in Science. stop #nepotisminscience . Kudos to authors of this @PLOSBiology paper for very clearly bringi…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @Joaquin_Sevilla: El estudio de las malas prácticas en ciencia es ya un campo cientítico... con cosas muy especializadas, hay que estudi…

It's pretty astounding how much nepotistic behavior there is in numerous areas of academic science

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @matejoresic: Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favor…

RT @WhiteRabbit36: No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, w…

Very interesting study ⁦@PLOSBiology. Top tier journals have issues due to editorial bias. Consequently, editorially favored authors can manage to publish there studies of poor quality. https://t.co/s3XedvLbCH

RT @Chauhanlab_ILS: Stop nepotism in Science. stop #nepotisminscience . Kudos to authors of this @PLOSBiology paper for very clearly bringi…

RT @WhiteRabbit36: No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, w…

RT @Chauhanlab_ILS: Stop nepotism in Science. stop #nepotisminscience . Kudos to authors of this @PLOSBiology paper for very clearly bringi…

@Fischblog @C_Holler sehe ich auch so https://t.co/OL1P33rspz

RT @WhiteRabbit36: No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, w…

It is a field of research every financing institution should support and implement to evaluate the research. We need more relevant project and less just for publications. https://t.co/mGRKWRcAc8

@DerNiederbayer @1900HO siehe https://t.co/OL1P33rspz

RT @WhiteRabbit36: No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, w…

RT @WhiteRabbit36: No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, w…

RT @WhiteRabbit36: No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, w…

RT @WhiteRabbit36: No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, w…

RT @fake_journals: "A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @Io…

RT @NaudetFlorian: ... and with the same team + @deevybee and Alexandre Scanff, a massive survey @PLOSBiology following this study and look…

RT @fake_journals: "A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @Io…

RT @Chauhanlab_ILS: Stop nepotism in Science. stop #nepotisminscience . Kudos to authors of this @PLOSBiology paper for very clearly bringi…

RT @WhiteRabbit36: No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, w…

RT @fake_journals: "A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @Io…

RT @Chauhanlab_ILS: Stop nepotism in Science. stop #nepotisminscience . Kudos to authors of this @PLOSBiology paper for very clearly bringi…

RT @Chauhanlab_ILS: Stop nepotism in Science. stop #nepotisminscience . Kudos to authors of this @PLOSBiology paper for very clearly bringi…

RT @Chauhanlab_ILS: Stop nepotism in Science. stop #nepotisminscience . Kudos to authors of this @PLOSBiology paper for very clearly bringi…

Stop nepotism in Science. stop #nepotisminscience . Kudos to authors of this @PLOSBiology paper for very clearly bringing this issue. Pllease RT https://t.co/dtNhNIBXsM

RT @WhiteRabbit36: No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, w…

RT @Joaquin_Sevilla: El estudio de las malas prácticas en ciencia es ya un campo cientítico... con cosas muy especializadas, hay que estudi…

No se podía saber: "Our results reveal a subset of journals where a few authors, often members of the editorial board, were responsible for a disproportionate number of publications."

RT @fake_journals: "A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @Io…

RT @fake_journals: "A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @Io…

RT @Joaquin_Sevilla: El estudio de las malas prácticas en ciencia es ya un campo cientítico... con cosas muy especializadas, hay que estudi…

RT @fake_journals: "A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @Io…

RT @fake_journals: "A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @Io…

RT @fake_journals: "A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @Io…

RT @Joaquin_Sevilla: El estudio de las malas prácticas en ciencia es ya un campo cientítico... con cosas muy especializadas, hay que estudi…

El estudio de las malas prácticas en ciencia es ya un campo cientítico... con cosas muy especializadas, hay que estudiar para seguir el tema...

RT @fake_journals: "A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @Io…

"A survey of biomedical journals to detect editorial bias and nepotistic behavior" @PLOS @PLOSBiology @NaudetFlorian @IoanaA_Cristea @dmoher @deevybee @Clara_Locher https://t.co/jOaMepJkd0 https://t.co/X1VtjQSsZK

@julimaelle @epsilon3141 @RetractionWatch Nur der Vollständigkeit halber: Raoult ist nicht nur wegen seiner HCQ Studien aufgefallen

@epsilon3141 @RetractionWatch „… the case of New Microbes & New Infections, an Elsevier jrnl, whose most prolific author, D Raoult, coauthored 32% of its 728 published papers. NMNI’s editor-in-chief & 6 additional associate editors of the jrnl work

RT @NaudetFlorian: ... and with the same team + @deevybee and Alexandre Scanff, a massive survey @PLOSBiology following this study and look…

RT @NaudetFlorian: ... and with the same team + @deevybee and Alexandre Scanff, a massive survey @PLOSBiology following this study and look…

That’s a fact

... and with the same team + @deevybee and Alexandre Scanff, a massive survey @PLOSBiology following this study and looking at indicators that may help to identify such nepotistic journals. https://t.co/Q5RbJOH377

RT @C0PE: Researchers explored the efficacy of two tools the Percentage of Papers by the Most Prolific author (PPMP) and the Gini index in…

RT @C0PE: Researchers explored the efficacy of two tools the Percentage of Papers by the Most Prolific author (PPMP) and the Gini index in…

RT @C0PE: Researchers explored the efficacy of two tools the Percentage of Papers by the Most Prolific author (PPMP) and the Gini index in…

RT @C0PE: Researchers explored the efficacy of two tools the Percentage of Papers by the Most Prolific author (PPMP) and the Gini index in…

Researchers explored the efficacy of two tools the Percentage of Papers by the Most Prolific author (PPMP) and the Gini index in identifying journals which showed editorial bias in accepting papers from specific authors. #ResearchIntegrity https://t.co/ZbN

RT @LexBouter: Another issue in #PublicationEthics : #Nepotism - some editors seem inclined to favor specific authors https://t.co/r01nERi…

RT @LexBouter: Another issue in #PublicationEthics : #Nepotism - some editors seem inclined to favor specific authors https://t.co/r01nERi…

RT @PLOSBiology: Massive survey of >5k journals explores relationship between hyper-prolific authors & journal editorial teams, finding a s…

RT @s4nuy3: @kperifanos @ElsevierConnect hello friend https://t.co/5qHqiUuMFC

@kperifanos @ElsevierConnect hello friend https://t.co/5qHqiUuMFC