Last year the annual number of papers retracted by research journals topped 10,000 for the first time. Most analysts believe the figure is only the tip of an iceberg of scientific fraud.

“The situation has become appalling,” said Professor Dorothy Bishop of Oxford University. “The level of publishing of fraudulent papers is creating serious problems for science. In many fields it is becoming difficult to build up a cumulative approach to a subject, because we lack a solid foundation of trustworthy findings. And it’s getting worse and worse.”

The startling rise in the publication of sham science papers has its roots in China, where young doctors and scientists seeking promotion were required to have published scientific papers. Shadow organisations – known as “paper mills” – began to supply fabricated work for publication in journals there.

The practice has since spread to India, Iran, Russia, former Soviet Union states and eastern Europe, with paper mills supplying ­fabricated studies to more and more journals as increasing numbers of young ­scientists try to boost their careers by claiming false research experience. In some cases, journal editors have been bribed to accept articles, while paper mills have managed to establish their own agents as guest editors who then allow reams of ­falsified work to be published.

  • PaintedSnail@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    There is no such thing as not having an “economic model.” As long as there are people with unmet needs and wants, there will be an economy, and that economy can be modeled and given a label.

      • jaycifer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Hunter: I want those berries
        Gatherer: I want that meat
        They swap their stuff
        A trade-based economy ensues

        • El Barto@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          OP threw a ridiculous strawman argument, but you threw it back at him with this great answer.

        • novibe@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          That is a simplification to make a point, but I think it’s important to know that this never happened.

          Barter economies didn’t exist as a historical process. They only existed in very specific situations. Such as when a market based economy collapses (for example after the Roman Empire collapsed, in some more distant places, until a new power could establish a market) and when two groups that had different economic models encountered each other.

          What existed before monetary market systems were debt systems, maybe with organised ledgers. And before that what existed were gift (like the Hawaiians) and palatial economies (like the Incas and Mycenaeans).

          This is already very well established within anthropology and archeology. David Graeber’s “Debt the first 5,000 years” was a bestseller man…

          TL,DR: Hunter gatherers didn’t barter. They did things for each other and then “owed” each other. This bond, of being indebted to your fellow men and them being indebted to you, is what was the basis of most societies.