Beyond #FakeScience: How to Overcome Shallow Certainty in Scholarly Communication

« Science journalism in Germany in the last days was awash with a report on “predatory publishers” and an integrity ‘crisis’ for German science. (…)

Since the value of mutual review of papers by peer researchers is well established, and since most authors usually will anyway avoid publishing behaviours that may somehow harm their reputations, it is no wonder that “predatory publishing” never really became a big thing, when seen in relation to the total outcome of scholarly communication. For instance, Martin Paul Eve and Ernesto Priego (2017) discussed that authors, even those who are duped by predatory publishers, are rarely actually harmed by such activities, and indeed the fear of harm is largely a myth perpetuated by traditional scholarly publishers that in reality exposes issues to do with the peer review system. (…) »