And don't forget the all too numerous instances of fraud which involved hoodwinking "professional peer reviewers" in the USA, UK, etc. and involved toll access journals. Of course high quality peer reviewing is important, but such refereeing occurs in OA just as much as in TA.
Charles
Professor Charles Oppenheim
Department of Information Science
Loughborough University
Loughborough
Leics LE11 3TU
e mail c.oppenheim_at_lboro.ac.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On Behalf Of Leslie Carr
Sent: 19 February 2010 10:13
To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
Subject: Re: Facing up to fraud - China's exponential research growth could fuel fraud
On 19 Feb 2010, at 05:00, Dana Roth wrote:
> The January 25 issue of Chemistry & Industry (issue 2, 2010) has a short article on research fraud which includes a sidebar on the situation in China (see below). This suggests that, contrary to Heather Morrison's suggestion, scholar led open access publishing is not a viable solution. Without a cadre of truly professional peer-reviewers, publication in Chinese journals will become increasingly suspect.
I draw the reverse conclusion. The frauds were discovered precisely because the already-peer-reviewed-material was available in an open access form for subsequent analysis.
See the IUCR editorial
http://journals.iucr.org/e/issues/2010/01/00/me0406/ , and the 2004 presentation to the BCA "Crystal Structure EPrints: Publication _at_ Source Through the Open Archive Initiative" (
http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/1633/ )
--
Les Carr
Received on Fri Feb 19 2010 - 16:42:44 GMT