Scientific sting operation shows how fake science garbage gets published in peer-reviewed journals
Long-time WUWT reader “Latitude” writes:
Academic journals are caught up in massive hoax involving 20 FAKE papers on ‘dog rape culture’, ‘a conceptual penis’ and re-printing a version of MEIN KAMPF
Their aim was to expose how ‘absurdities’ get published in legitimate peer-reviewed academic papers due to a lack of critical review.
In total the team of three researchers wrote 20 hoax papers on a field of study loosely defined as ‘grievance studies’.
These papers – seven of which were accepted and four published online – were based on just ‘nutty or inhumane’ ideas that they ran with.
The authors claim their prank shows that higher education’s fixation with identity politics has created ‘absurd and horrific’ scholarship, according to an in-depth piece by Wall Street Journal.
They even associated male anatomy with climate change.
BTW, this excellent post in 2016 was prescient:
And just this year, there was another expose’
According to Ioannidis, the peer-review process guarantees little in terms of trustworthiness even before political agendas compromise the issue.
“[W]hen studies are replicated, they rarely come up with the same results. Only a third of the 100 studies published in three top psychology journals could be successfully replicated in a large 2015 test,” AFP reported, summarizing Ioannidis’ findings.
“Medicine, epidemiology, population science, and nutritional studies fare no better, Ioannidis said, when attempts are made to replicate them,” according to AFP.
When only a third of peer-reviewed studies reach the same results when they are replicated by outside authors, this is a serious problem.
via Watts Up With That? https://ift.tt/1Viafi3