Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Another scam paper published in a “scientific” journal

whyevolutionistrue.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: Another scam paper published in a “scientific” journal

#31

Post by fabian2k »

vegannet wrote: post #5

As a lay-person who reads scientific papers sometimes because they’re referenced on HN, how do I validate the credibility of a journal? Does a directory of journals exist with scoring, or is there a strategy I can use when evaluating a paper or journal to determine credibility?

As a very rough first filter, for papers in the area of natural sciences, check if the paper is indexed in Pubmed (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). Every legimitate peer-reviewed journal in that area is indexed there, anything that is not indexed is almost certainly a dubious journal. But you can't use this the other way around, Pubmed still contains some journals that publish questionable stuff.

Beyond that you can look a bit at the impact factor of the journal, you can generally find it by just googling for the name of the journal + "impact factor" or on the Wikipedia page of the journal. But it is kinda hard to interpret this on its own, and it does not translate directly into credibility. A high impact factor shows that articles in that journal are cited very often, and you can assume that journals with high impact factors generally have a reasonable peer review system. But that doesn't say much for a single paper, reputable journals can easily fail in individual cases.

The Pubmed check generally filters out most of the journals that would just publish anything without real review, so it's the most useful filter in my opinion. I would not try to gauge more meaning than that from the journal and focus on the individual article.

Re: Another scam paper published in a “scientific” journal

#32

Post by bonoboTP »

corty wrote: post #29
vegannet wrote: post #5

As a lay-person who reads scientific papers sometimes because they’re referenced on HN, how do I validate the credibility of a journal? Does a directory of journals exist with scoring, or is there a strategy I can use when evaluating a paper or journal to determine credibility?

Actually, asking for the credibility of a journal is the wrong question. The real one is about whether an article is credible. But the answer to that is disappointingly complicated. Articles are peer-reviewed for their readability (for peers, not laymen), consistency (e.g. if there is a mathematical proof in there, the reviewer might check it if possible. if there is an experimental technique, the reviewer might chec…

Right, I think many people believe peer review to be some big expert committee giving a paper lots of analysis and evaluation. In reality they are mostly PhD students with 1-5 years experience, not experts with decades of experience and one person may get like 5-10 papers to review at a time. Oh and it's unpaid work that gets time away from your own research and is not really incentivized beyond a vague sense of moral duty towards the progress of mankind's knowledge. The end result is that it's mostly pattern matching, does it look like the typical paper in the field? The gut reaction and impression strongly influences the decision, then the actual review is about justifying that decision.

I mean it's not totally arbitrary, really good reviewers do give it like 2-5 hours, but it's best thought of as a rudimentary filter rather than a meticulous verification.

Re: Another scam paper published in a “scientific” journal

#33

Post by bonoboTP »

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #30
bonoboTP wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are impact factors and top lists, and you can check out the Wikipedia page of the journal if it exists. You can google what are the "top journals for ". You can check the publisher. IEEE and Springer for example tend to be genuine. But you still have to look at the individual paper and can't believe it just based on a single article. Research articles are for sharing results among experts (and for advancing the…

> You're better off learning from textbooks so you get info that has been verified, digested and distilled and represent consensus. A very large body of consensus ended up in textbooks that had either never been attempted te be reproduced, or was attempted, much later, and couldn't be reproduced, yet continued to remain in textbooks. The truth of the matter is that most scientific research will never see an attempt a…

That may happen in exceptional cases, but less so for sciences with more concrete results. To learn about human psychology and society perhaps you're better off reading great novels than p-hacked sexy "research".

Regarding replication... Replication is boring in the eyes of funding committees. They want new and sexy results for their money, preferably at a steady rate of a bunch of papers each year.

Re: Another scam paper published in a “scientific” journal

#34

Post by DataWorker »

vegannet wrote: post #5

As a lay-person who reads scientific papers sometimes because they’re referenced on HN, how do I validate the credibility of a journal? Does a directory of journals exist with scoring, or is there a strategy I can use when evaluating a paper or journal to determine credibility?

Evaluate the authors directly.

Re: Another scam paper published in a “scientific” journal

#37

Post by chabad360 »

vegannet wrote: post #5

As a lay-person who reads scientific papers sometimes because they’re referenced on HN, how do I validate the credibility of a journal? Does a directory of journals exist with scoring, or is there a strategy I can use when evaluating a paper or journal to determine credibility?

I believe you can probably get a good answer to your question with Beall's list: https://beallslist.net/

Re: Another scam paper published in a “scientific” journal

#38

Post by voqv »

vegannet wrote: post #5

As a lay-person who reads scientific papers sometimes because they’re referenced on HN, how do I validate the credibility of a journal? Does a directory of journals exist with scoring, or is there a strategy I can use when evaluating a paper or journal to determine credibility?

Maybe it's an unpopular opinion, and biased by fields I've worked in as a grad, but I think you really just can't validate a particular paper without a background in the field. You need lots of context: recent works of that university department, credability/background of the last author post doc/professor, state of the art and cornerstone works in that field.

You could probably gain an entry level background (except for highly mathematical or medical things) by spending 5-10 hours a week for a few months reading various papers/online discussions. Assuming you have access to those forums. You should know thats the lower bound amount of literature reading full-time students have to do to keep up with their own field.

Re: Another scam paper published in a “scientific” journal

#39

Post by auggierose »

free0ne wrote: post #36

"Finally, we would like to acknowledge that this study would not have been possible had it not been for the predatory journal industry. Without it, academia and society would be a better place." Acknowledgement is gold.

Academia fucked that up all on their own.

Re: Another scam paper published in a “scientific” journal

#40

Post by tasogare »

voqv wrote: post #38
vegannet wrote: post #5

As a lay-person who reads scientific papers sometimes because they’re referenced on HN, how do I validate the credibility of a journal? Does a directory of journals exist with scoring, or is there a strategy I can use when evaluating a paper or journal to determine credibility?

Maybe it's an unpopular opinion, and biased by fields I've worked in as a grad, but I think you really just can't validate a particular paper without a background in the field. You need lots of context: recent works of that university department, credability/background of the last author post doc/professor, state of the art and cornerstone works in that field. You could probably gain an entry level background (except…

> literature reading full-time students

Nobody keeps reading full time, that would not only be insane it would also be conterproductive since it’s time not spend actually doing something or writing papers. In most place it’s not necessary to know all the recent papers, and if a really important one is missing as a reference, a reviewer will note it in the comments.

Post reply on HN