IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i4d10.1007_s11192-024-04960-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emerging plagiarism in peer-review evaluation reports: a tip of the iceberg?

Author

Listed:
  • Mikołaj Piniewski

    (Warsaw University of Life Sciences)

  • Ivan Jarić

    (Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution
    Biology Centre of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Hydrobiology)

  • Demetris Koutsoyiannis

    (National Technical University of Athens)

  • Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz

    (Poznań University of Life Sciences)

Abstract

The phenomenon of plagiarism in peer-review evaluation reports remained surprisingly unrecognized, despite a notable rise of such cases in recent years. This study reports multiple cases of peer-review plagiarism recently detected in 50 different scientific articles published in 19 journals. Their in-depth analysis reveals that such reviews tend to be nonsensical, vague and unrelated to the actual manuscript. The analysis is followed by a discussion of the roots of such plagiarism, its consequences and measures that could counteract its further spreading. In addition, we demonstrate how increased availability and access to AI technologies through recent emergence of chatbots may be misused to write or conceal plagiarized peer-reviews. Plagiarizing reviews is a severe misconduct that requires urgent attention and action from all affected parties.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikołaj Piniewski & Ivan Jarić & Demetris Koutsoyiannis & Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz, 2024. "Emerging plagiarism in peer-review evaluation reports: a tip of the iceberg?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(4), pages 2489-2498, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04960-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-04960-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-04960-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-024-04960-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04960-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.