A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review | Science and Engineering Ethics
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Peer review is the most important aspect of reputable journals. Without it, we would be unsure about whether the material published was as valid and reliable as is possible. However, with the advent of the Internet, scientific literature has now become subject to a relatively new phenomenon: fake peer reviews. Some dishonest researchers have been manipulating the peer review process to publish what are often inferior papers. There are even papers that explain how to do it. This paper discusses one of those methods and how editors can defeat it by using a special review ID. This method is easy to understand and can be added to current peer review systems easily.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Basnet, R. B., Mukkamala, S., & Sung, A. H. (2008). Detection of phishing attacks: A machine learning approach. Soft Computing Applications in Industry, 226, 373–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beall, J. (2016). Dangerous predatory publishers threaten medical research. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 31(10), 1511–1513. doi:10.3346/jkms.2016.31.10.1511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dadkhah, M., & Bianciardi, G. (2016). Hackers spy scientists. Indian Pediatrics, 53(11), 1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dadkhah, M., Lagzian, M., & Borchardt, G. (2017). Identity theft in the academic world leads to junk science. Science and Engineering Ethics. doi:10.1007/s11948-016-9867-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dileep Kumar, J., Srikanth, V., & Tejeswini, L. (2016). Email phishing attack mitigation using server side email addon. Indian Journal of Science & Technology, 9(19), 1–5. doi:10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i19/91161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinev, T. (2006). Why spoofing is serious internet fraud. Communications of the ACM, 49(10), 76–82. doi:10.1145/1164394.1164398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamid, I. R. A., Abawajy, J., & Kim, T.-H. (2013). Using feature selection and classification scheme for automating phishing email detection. Studies in Informatics and Control, 22(1), 61–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haug, C. J. (2015). Peer-review fraud—hacking the scientific publication process. New England Journal of Medicine, 373(25), 2393–2395. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1512330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, R. S., & Ali, S. T. (2015). A computer vision technique to detect phishing attacks. In Paper presented at the communication systems and network technologies (CSNT), 2015 fifth international conference on.

  • Resnik, D. B., & Elmore, S. A. (2016). Ensuring the quality, fairness, and integrity of journal peer review: A possible role of editors. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(1), 169–188. doi:10.1007/s11948-015-9625-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Al-Khatib, A. (2017). Should authors be requested to suggest peer reviewers? Science and Engineering Ethics. doi:10.1007/s11948-016-9842-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

    Mehdi Dadkhah

  2. WTLab, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

    Mohsen Kahani

  3. Progressive Science Institute, Box 5335, Berkeley, CA, 94705, USA

    Glenn Borchardt

Authors
  1. Mehdi Dadkhah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohsen Kahani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Glenn Borchardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehdi Dadkhah.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dadkhah, M., Kahani, M. & Borchardt, G. A Method for Improving the Integrity of Peer Review. Sci Eng Ethics 24, 1603–1610 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9960-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation