Questionable papers in citation databases as an issue for literature review

Area of Science:

• Bibliometrics
• Scholarly Communication
• Research Integrity

Background:

• Increasing prevalence of academic misconduct, including data manipulation and predatory/hijacked journals.
• Growing body of literature addressing detection and countermeasures for academic dishonesty.
• Existing research primarily focuses on identifying predatory journals and issuing warnings.

Purpose of the Study:

• To address the overlooked issue of questionable papers appearing in standard citation databases.
• To propose a method for flagging publications from predatory or hijacked journals.
• To enhance awareness among researchers regarding the integrity of cited literature.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of current literature on academic misconduct and citation databases.
• Identification of gaps in existing detection and flagging mechanisms.
• Conceptual framework for a flagging system within citation databases.

Main Results:

• Questionable papers published in predatory or hijacked journals are often indexed in standard citation databases.
• Lack of a mechanism to differentiate legitimate research from publications in unreliable sources.
• Potential for widespread dissemination and citation of unverified research.

Conclusions:

• A system to flag papers from predatory or hijacked journals is crucial.
• Flagging will improve research integrity and prevent the use of unreliable sources in literature reviews.
• Future researchers need tools to assess the credibility of cited works.