Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 8, 2025
07:52
Investigating Motor Skill Learning Processes with a Robotic Manipulandum
Published on: February 12, 2017
8.8K
Safeguarding scientific integrity: A case study in examining manipulation in the peer review process
Leslie D McIntosh1, Cynthia Hudson Vitale1,2
1Research Integrity, Digital Science, London, UK.
Accountability in Research
|December 12, 2023
Summary
Conflicts of interest among editors, authors, and peer reviewers in a special journal issue on fertility, pregnancy, and mental health compromised objectivity. Undisclosed ties to anti-abortion groups highlight risks to research integrity and disinformation.
Area of Science:
- Medical Ethics
- Reproductive Health Research
- Scientific Publishing Integrity
Background:
- Special journal issues require rigorous oversight to ensure unbiased research.
- Fertility, pregnancy, and mental health topics are sensitive and prone to external influence.
- Assessing conflicts of interest is crucial for maintaining scientific credibility.
Purpose of the Study:
- To analyze the expertise, conflicts of interest, and objectivity of contributors to a special journal issue.
- To identify potential biases stemming from affiliations and relationships among authors, editors, and peer reviewers.
- To evaluate the transparency and integrity of the peer review process in a specific context.
Main Methods:
- Case study methodology focusing on a 2022 special journal issue.
- Data collection on qualifications, affiliations, and relationships of authors, editors, and peer reviewers.
- Analysis of potential conflicts of interest, particularly undisclosed ties to advocacy groups.
Main Results:
- Two articles revealed undisclosed conflicts of interest involving authors, an editor, and peer reviewers.
- Affiliations with anti-abortion advocacy and lobbying groups were identified, compromising objectivity.
- Lack of transparency was observed, potentially enabling biased research and disinformation.
Conclusions:
- Undisclosed conflicts of interest can significantly undermine the objectivity of scientific publications.
- The peer review process is vulnerable to bias when affiliations are not transparent.
- Recommendations for enhancing integrity in special journal issues are needed to combat disinformation.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
01:56Ethics in Research
23.0K
Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.
23.0K
01:22Bias
4.2K
Bias refers to any tendency that prevents a question from being considered unprejudiced. In research, bias occurs when one outcome or answer is selected or encouraged over others in sampling or testing. Bias can occur during any research phase, including study design, data collection, analysis, and publication.
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
4.2K
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
130
Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
130
01:50Statistical Significance
20.1K
Once data is collected from both the experimental and the control groups, a statistical analysis is conducted to find out if there are meaningful differences between the two groups. A statistical analysis determines how likely any difference found is due to chance (and thus not meaningful). In psychology, group differences are considered meaningful, or significant, if the odds that these differences occurred by chance alone are 5 percent or less. Stated another way, if we repeated this...
20.1K
02:05Self-Presentation: Self-Monitoring and Self-Handicapping
39.0K
People can go to great lengths to protect their self-image and present themselves in ways that they want others to see them. Sociologist Erving Goffman presented the idea that a person is like an actor on a stage. Calling his theory dramaturgy, Goffman believed that we use “impression management” to present ourselves to others as we hope to be perceived. Each situation is a new scene, and individuals perform different roles depending on who is present (Goffman, 1959). Think about...
39.0K
01:23Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective
105
In a study where individuals posing as strangers offered compliments and proposed casual sex to students, the responses differed significantly based on gender. Not a single woman accepted the proposal, while 70% of the men agreed. This outcome provides a useful scenario to explore through the lens of evolutionary psychology and social learning theory, highlighting the diverse perspectives on human sexual behaviors.
Evolutionary psychology provides one explanation for these findings, suggesting...
Evolutionary psychology provides one explanation for these findings, suggesting...
105