lingo.lol is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A place for linguists, philologists, and other lovers of languages.

Server stats:

54
active users

#ResearchIntegrity

3 posts3 participants0 posts today

Our new #preprint is out! 🚨 "Gulf of America or Mexico? Geopolitical renaming and its academic consequences":

🔗 dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.537983

We explore how President 🇺🇸 Donald J. Trump’s executive order renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America risks turning settled geography into an “error of historical fact” - with complex implications for academic freedom, editorial policy, and research integrity.

A new study examined how well US university faculty across disciplines know about #PredatoryJournals. The strongest predictor of knowledge wasn’t career length or early-career status - it was the number of articles published in the past 5 years.

:doi: doi.org/10.1002/leap.2020

The authors conclude that professional development on this topic should target not only early-career, but also senior researchers - especially those who rarely publish in journals.

ORCID's record summaries make Trust Markers easy to see! 🔍

📖 Found at the top of each ORCID record, record summaries can be expanded to see each Trust Marker found in the record for affiliations, works, peer reviews, funding, professional activities, and more.

📆 The record summary also includes key dates, such as when the record was created and last updated.

Learn more 👉 info.orcid.org/ufaqs/orcid-rec

ORCIDORCID Record Summaries - Trust Markersa ORCID Record Summaries – Trust Markers As a result of our discussions with publishers, vendors, and researchers we have developed an initial record summary prototype. We’re hoping to make […]

This is an essential, but depressing, read if you are concerned about trends in scientific publishing and research fraud.

pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2420

We are fortunate in astrophysics not to have (as far as I know) as big a problem as some of the life sciences, but the perverse incentives operate here also.

There's also a good blog by the first author

reeserichardson.blog/2025/08/0

Did you know?

🆔 ORCID has an unwavering commitment to data privacy. In this session from ORCID's Research Integrity webinar series you can learn about updates to ORCID's Privacy Policy and other information about data protection at ORCID.

👉 Watch the replay here: vimeo.com/1035343268?share=copy

👉 Download the presentation here: orcid.filecamp.com/s/d/QjAIIeH

Missed one of the events from our Research Integrity series?

No problem! You can catch all the replays and presentation materials over on our ORCID On-Demand page.

✅ Research Integrity Featuring Infolinx
✅ Research Integrity: The ORCID Privacy Policy
✅ Research Integrity Featuring Signals
✅ Research Integrity Featuring TCC Africa
✅ Researching Integrity Featuring STM Solutions

👉 Check it out here: info.orcid.org/orcid-on-demand/

ORCIDORCID On-Demand

Did you know?

🆔 ORCID has an unwavering commitment to data privacy. In this session from ORCID's Research Integrity webinar series you can learn about updates to ORCID's Privacy Policy and other information about data protection at ORCID.

👉 Watch the replay here: vimeo.com/1035343268?share=copy

👉 Download the presentation here: orcid.filecamp.com/s/d/QjAIIeH

Hidden prompt injections have breached the gates of scientific publishing—AI-assisted peer review is now a new battleground for research integrity. Who knew the next big plot twist in science would be written in invisible ink? Turns out, even science isn’t safe from a clever hack. And as a hacker, I can’t help but admire the ingenuity—though the risks are all too real.

asia.nikkei.com/Business/Techn

Nikkei Asia · 'Positive review only': Researchers hide AI prompts in papersBy Staff Writer

Missed one of the events from our Research Integrity series?

No problem! You can catch all the replays and presentation materials over on our ORCID On-Demand page.

✅ Research Integrity Featuring Infolinx
✅ Research Integrity: The ORCID Privacy Policy
✅ Research Integrity Featuring Signals
✅ Research Integrity Featuring TCC Africa
✅ Researching Integrity Featuring STM Solutions

👉 Check it out here: info.orcid.org/orcid-on-demand

ORCIDORCID On-Demand

Did you know?

🆔 ORCID has an unwavering commitment to data privacy. In this session from ORCID's Research Integrity webinar series you can learn about updates to ORCID's Privacy Policy and other information about data protection at ORCID.

👉 Watch the replay here: vimeo.com/1035343268?share=cop

👉 Download the presentation here: orcid.filecamp.com/s/d/QjAIIeH

Just deposited preprint reporting results of Delphi survey on attitudes to sanctions for serious research misconduct
zenodo.org/records/15774358
#fraud #researchIntegrity

ZenodoFAIRS Delphi Survey: Attitudes to sanctions for serious research misconductAbstract Background: Research fraud is often seen as a rare event, but evidence from self-report surveys indicates that fabrication and falsification of data are common enough to be a problem. This study assessed attitudes to serious research misconduct, contrasting views of self-appointed research "sleuths" and research integrity officers (RIOs). Methods: Respondents completed a two-round Delphi survey, rating agreement with statements about prevalence, responses to, and consequences of serious research misconduct. In Round 1, there were 95 respondents (37 sleuths, 33 RIOs and 25 other). For Round 2, there were 79 respondents (36 sleuths, 22 RIOs and 21 other). Results: Respondents agreed on the damaging impact of academic incentive structures on research integrity, and the importance of agencies working together to address serious research misconduct and preserve the academic record. There was polarization of views between sleuths and RIOs on the frequency of serious research misconduct, the adequacy of institutional responses, and the suitability of self-regulation by institutions. Conclusion: Sleuths and RIOs operate in information silos. They could benefit from working together, but this will only be possible if trust is restored. Given dissatisfaction with institutional self-regulation, drawbacks and benefits of alternative regulatory models need to be evaluated.
Continued thread

3/ Nicola Adamson, Journal Development Editor

With a background in neuroscience, Nicola’s interest in #ResearchIntegrity led her to eLife, starting as an Editorial Assistant. Now, she has a key role in shaping our growth through tracking data trends and engaging with editors.

"Ambiguous one-word journal titles are a MDPI trademark (“Foods”, “Plants”). In the spirit of “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em”, Springer Nature has launched a series of journals, the “Discover” series, with near-identical names (Discover Food, Discover Plants).

(...) You can try it yourself in our “Guess Who Is Who” mini-game (...)

Why? How? And let’s ask the most important question of all: who will this benefit? It’s certainly not the authors."

the-strain-on-scientific-publi

In the research life cycle, data stewards are the unsung heroes who ensure datasets are organized, documented, and reusable. Without them, context is lost, metadata vanishes, and continuity breaks down, turning valuable research into an unsolvable puzzle.

Stewardship isn’t just good practice but, is essential for reproducibility, collaboration, and long-term impact.

Keynote on author identity from @alicemeadows this morning on the final day at our conference in Oslo.

The recent STM Association report on trusted identity recommends institutionally verified identity and using ORCID trust markers:
stm-assoc.org/new-stm-report-t

🧵
ease.org.uk/ease-events/18th-e