Ancestors

Toot

Written by Dorothy Bishop on 2025-01-18 at 15:52

New blogpost: nonsensical papers as canaries in the coalmine - and more bad news for MDPI.

https://deevybee.blogspot.com/2025/01/tomatoes-roaming-fields-and-canaries-in.html

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from deevybee@mastodon.social

Descendants

Written by El Duvelle on 2025-01-18 at 16:35

@deevybee wow, the whole thing, the article, the reviewer's comments, the author's response.. Even the response of #MDPI, not taking immediate action.. 🤦

I guess we shouldn't be surprised, but still, you are right that if they don't even maintain a semblance of trustworthiness their funding will eventually take a hit..

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from elduvelle@neuromatch.social

Written by Dorothy Bishop on 2025-01-18 at 16:44

@elduvelle There's also a remarkable paragraph that uses the word 'betwixt' three times....

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from deevybee@mastodon.social

Written by El Duvelle on 2025-01-18 at 17:05

@deevybee ... And just had a look at the Pubpeer thread, that is certainly something else!!

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from elduvelle@neuromatch.social

Written by Ulrike Hahn on 2025-01-18 at 17:42

@elduvelle @deevybee “serious tomatoes”….

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from UlrikeHahn@fediscience.org

Written by SellaTheChemist on 2025-01-19 at 09:55

@elduvelle @deevybee The enshittification of science/learning.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from sellathechemist@mastodon.social

Written by Boris Barbour on 2025-01-18 at 17:41

@deevybee

^ A serious case of a "journal" not reading, even once, a paper they published. It's difficult to express how far removed from the classical notion careful curation in scientific publishing this is. Were the publisher even remotely serious, the heads of authors, referees and editors at least would be figuratively but very publicly rolling already. They are not, ergo MDPI is not a scientific publisher.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from BorisBarbour@mastodon.social

Written by Léo Varnet on 2025-01-19 at 07:31

@deevybee in a way these nonsensical papers are a sort of large-scale scholarly hoax: instead of testing the peer-review process of a few journals, they target all journals at once.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from LeoVarnet@fediscience.org

Written by Dorothy Bishop on 2025-01-21 at 06:30

@LeoVarnet

Hoax implies intentionality. these guys just have found a way to publish anything and are exploiting it for all it is worth

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from deevybee@mastodon.social

Written by Jochen Lingelbach on 2025-01-24 at 12:42

@deevybee

Oh wow! Thanks for this.

"Finland had downgraded its classification of 187 MDPI journals because of evidence of "minimum time spend for editorial work and quality assessment", at the same time that German universities had secured a national publishing agreement with MDPI"

Why did German universities deal with #MDPI ? I thought its obviously #predatory and not be given anything

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from JochenLingelba1@h-net.social

Written by Jochen Lingelbach on 2025-01-24 at 12:51

@deevybee

Oh I see your other post on this now. Thanks! Really embarassing for German academia

http://deevybee.blogspot.com/2024/12/finland-vs-germany-case-of-mdpi.html?m=1

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from JochenLingelba1@h-net.social