Framework for assessing the risk to a field from fraudulent research
Ni, C.; Hutchins, B. I.
Show abstract
Concerns over research integrity are rising, with increasing attention to potential threats from untrustworthy authors. We established a framework to gauge the potential negative influence of researchers potentially engaged in misconduct. The field of Alzheimers Disease (AD) research has been a focal point of these worries. This study aims to assess the risk posed by questionable studies or individuals potentially engaging in fraudulent science in research by examining citation relationships among papers, taking AD research as an illustrative example. Analysis of citation network structure can elucidate the potential propagation of misinformation arising at the author level. Our analysis revealed that there arent any single authors or papers whose citation connections jeopardize a major portion of the fields literature. This indicates a low probability of single entities undermining the majority of works in this area. However, our findings suggest that attention to research integrity of the most influential scientists is warranted. Some scientists can reach a sizable minority of the literature through citations to their work. Emphasizing oversight of the integrity of these authors is crucial, given their influence on the field. Our study introduces an analytical framework adaptable across various fields and disciplines to evaluate potential risks from fraudulence.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- A multiscale closed-loop neurotoxicity model of Alzheimer's disease progression explains functional connectivity alterations 89%
- 3D analysis of the synaptic organization in the Entorhinal cortex in Alzheimer's disease 88%
- Factors that Influence Career Choice Among Different Populations of Neuroscience Trainees 88%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.