bioRxivScientific Communication & EducationPreprint
Trends in hoaxes of academic communication
Abstract
Academic journals use peer review to weed out false information, but peer review and other editorial processes are normally confidential. Therefore, individuals sometimes create hoaxes to test whether editorial processes are as robust as they are claimed, or whether they are done at all. This article tracks the occurrence of hoaxes aimed at scholarly publishers and academic conferences since 2000. Since 2009, successful hoaxes usually appeared at a year of one or more a year, usually motivated by academics or journalists exposing so-called "predatory" journals. The apparent rise in the number of hoaxes reflects a lack of transparency in editorial processes at both legitimate and "predatory" journals. Reaction of academic communities to hoaxes varies widely depending on the perceived intent of the target of the hoaxes and whether the hoax demonstrates what the hoaxer claims.
- Citations
- 0
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Is most published research really false?
Jeffrey T Leek, Leah R Jager·bioRxiv·Apr 27, 2016
- "I'd like to think I'd be able to spot one if I saw one": How science journalists navigate predatory journals
Alice Fleerackers, Laura L. Moorhead, Juan Pablo Alperín·Journalism PracticePeer-reviewed·Sep 2, 2025
- A survey on information sources used by academic researchers to evaluate scientific instruments
Carsten Bergenholtz, Samuel C. MacAulay, … Inge Seim·bioRxiv·May 3, 2018
- From impact metrics and open science to communicating research: Journalists' awareness of academic controversies
Alice Fleerackers, Laura L. Moorhead, … Lauren A. Maggio·PLoS ONEPeer-reviewed·Jan 27, 2025
- Peer review and preprint policies are unclear at most major journals
T. Klebel, S. Reichmann, … T. Ross-Hellauer·bioRxiv·Jan 24, 2020
- Who reviews for predatory journals? A study on reviewer characteristics
A. Severin, M. Strinzel, … T. F. Barros·bioRxiv·Mar 9, 2020