Prevalence of plagiarism in hijacked journals: A text similarity analysis.

IF 2.8 1区哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-08-17 DOI:10.1080/08989621.2024.2387210

Anna Abalkina

{"title":"Prevalence of plagiarism in hijacked journals: A text similarity analysis.","authors":"Anna Abalkina","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2387210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The study examines the prevalence of plagiarism in hijacked journals, a category of problematic journals that have proliferated over the past decade.Methods: A quasi-random sample of 936 papers published in 58 hijacked journals that provided free access to their archive as of June 2021 was selected for the analysis. The study utilizes Urkund (Ouriginal) software and manual verification to investigate plagiarism and finds a significant prevalence of plagiarism in hijacked journals.Results: Out of the analyzed sample papers, 618 (66%) were found to contain instances of plagiarism, and 28% of papers from the sample (n = 259) displayed text similarities of 25% or more. The analysis reveals that a majority of authors originate from developing and ex-Soviet countries, with limited affiliation ties to developed countries and scarce international cooperation in papers submitted to hijacked journals. The absence of rigorous publication requirements, peer review processes, and plagiarism checks in hijacked journals creates an environment where authors can publish texts with a significant amount of plagiarism.Conclusions: These findings suggest a tendency for fraudulent journals to attract authors who do not uphold scientific integrity principles. The legitimization of papers from hijacked journals in bibliographic databases, along with their citation, poses significant challenges to scientific integrity.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2024.2387210","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The study examines the prevalence of plagiarism in hijacked journals, a category of problematic journals that have proliferated over the past decade.

Methods: A quasi-random sample of 936 papers published in 58 hijacked journals that provided free access to their archive as of June 2021 was selected for the analysis. The study utilizes Urkund (Ouriginal) software and manual verification to investigate plagiarism and finds a significant prevalence of plagiarism in hijacked journals.

Results: Out of the analyzed sample papers, 618 (66%) were found to contain instances of plagiarism, and 28% of papers from the sample (n = 259) displayed text similarities of 25% or more. The analysis reveals that a majority of authors originate from developing and ex-Soviet countries, with limited affiliation ties to developed countries and scarce international cooperation in papers submitted to hijacked journals. The absence of rigorous publication requirements, peer review processes, and plagiarism checks in hijacked journals creates an environment where authors can publish texts with a significant amount of plagiarism.

Conclusions: These findings suggest a tendency for fraudulent journals to attract authors who do not uphold scientific integrity principles. The legitimization of papers from hijacked journals in bibliographic databases, along with their citation, poses significant challenges to scientific integrity.

查看原文本刊更多论文

被劫持期刊中的剽窃现象：文本相似性分析

研究背景本研究探讨了被劫持期刊中剽窃论文的普遍程度，被劫持期刊是过去十年间激增的一类问题期刊：本研究选取了截至 2021 年 6 月在 58 种劫持期刊上发表的 936 篇论文作为准随机样本进行分析。研究利用Urkund（Ouriginal）软件和人工验证来调查剽窃行为，发现被劫持期刊的剽窃现象非常普遍：在分析的样本论文中，发现 618 篇（66%）论文存在抄袭现象，28% 的样本论文（n = 259）文本相似度达到或超过 25%。分析显示，大多数作者来自发展中国家和前苏联国家，与发达国家的隶属关系有限，向被劫持期刊投稿的论文很少有国际合作。被劫持期刊缺乏严格的出版要求、同行评审程序和剽窃检查，这为作者发表大量剽窃文章创造了环境：这些研究结果表明，欺诈性期刊倾向于吸引不遵守科学诚信原则的作者。被劫持期刊的论文在书目数据库中的合法化及其引用对科学诚信构成了重大挑战。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance MEDICAL ETHICS-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

14.70%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.