The existence of stealth corrections in scientific literature -- a threat to scientific integrity

Rene Aquarius, Floris Schoeters, Nick Wise, Alex Glynn, Guillaume Cabanac
{"title":"The existence of stealth corrections in scientific literature -- a threat to scientific integrity","authors":"Rene Aquarius, Floris Schoeters, Nick Wise, Alex Glynn, Guillaume Cabanac","doi":"arxiv-2409.06852","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Thorough maintenance of the scientific record is needed to\nensure the trustworthiness of its content. This can be undermined by a stealth\ncorrection, which is at least one post-publication change made to a scientific\narticle, without providing a correction note or any other indicator that the\npublication was temporarily or permanently altered. In this paper we provide\nseveral examples of stealth corrections in order to demonstrate that these\nexist within the scientific literature. As far as we are aware, no\ndocumentation of such stealth corrections was previously reported in the\nscientific literature. Methods: We identified stealth corrections ourselves, or found already\nreported ones on the public database pubpeer.com or through social media\naccounts of known science sleuths. Results: In total we report 131 articles that were affected by stealth\ncorrections and were published between 2005 and 2024. These stealth corrections\nwere found among multiple publishers and scientific fields. Conclusion: and recommendations Stealth corrections exist in the scientific\nliterature. This needs to end immediately as it threatens scientific integrity.\nWe recommend the following: 1) Tracking all changes to the published record by\nall publishers in an open, uniform and transparent manner, preferably by online\nsubmission systems that log every change publicly, making stealth corrections\nimpossible; 2) Clear definitions and guidelines on all types of corrections; 3)\nSupport sustained vigilance of the scientific community to publicly register\nstealth corrections.","PeriodicalId":501285,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Digital Libraries","volume":"110 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Digital Libraries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.06852","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Thorough maintenance of the scientific record is needed to ensure the trustworthiness of its content. This can be undermined by a stealth correction, which is at least one post-publication change made to a scientific article, without providing a correction note or any other indicator that the publication was temporarily or permanently altered. In this paper we provide several examples of stealth corrections in order to demonstrate that these exist within the scientific literature. As far as we are aware, no documentation of such stealth corrections was previously reported in the scientific literature. Methods: We identified stealth corrections ourselves, or found already reported ones on the public database pubpeer.com or through social media accounts of known science sleuths. Results: In total we report 131 articles that were affected by stealth corrections and were published between 2005 and 2024. These stealth corrections were found among multiple publishers and scientific fields. Conclusion: and recommendations Stealth corrections exist in the scientific literature. This needs to end immediately as it threatens scientific integrity. We recommend the following: 1) Tracking all changes to the published record by all publishers in an open, uniform and transparent manner, preferably by online submission systems that log every change publicly, making stealth corrections impossible; 2) Clear definitions and guidelines on all types of corrections; 3) Support sustained vigilance of the scientific community to publicly register stealth corrections.
科学文献中隐形更正的存在--对科学诚信的威胁
导言:为了确保科学记录内容的可信度,需要对科学记录进行彻底的维护。隐性更正是指在科学文章发表后对其进行至少一次修改,但不提供更正说明或任何其他表明该文章被临时或永久修改的迹象。在本文中,我们提供了几个隐性更正的例子,以证明这些更正存在于科学文献中。据我们所知,以前的科学文献中没有关于此类隐性更正的记录。方法:我们自己发现了隐性更正,或者在公共数据库 pubpeer.com 上找到了已经报道过的隐性更正,或者通过已知科学侦探的社交媒体账户找到了隐性更正。结果:我们总共报告了 131 篇受到隐性更正影响的文章,这些文章发表于 2005 年至 2024 年之间。这些隐性更正出现在多个出版商和科学领域。结论:和建议 科学文献中存在隐性更正。我们建议采取以下措施:1)以公开、统一和透明的方式跟踪所有出版商对已发表记录的所有修改,最好是通过在线提交系统,公开记录每一个修改,使隐形更正成为不可能;2)对所有类型的更正进行明确的定义和指导;3)支持科学界持续保持警惕,公开登记隐形更正。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信