This is crazy. I wonder what the context was for making up reviewers. Because it sounds like the paper would’ve maybe still been published without the fake reviewers
fake reviews lol
Submitted 5 months ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/91d4c57c-7269-4a47-8298-18e0eef12deb.png
Comments
somethingp@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Adalast@lemmy.world 5 months ago
It was published, hence the first word being “Post-publication”. I think the issue for the retraction is that if 4 or the reviewers were lying about their identies then the voracity of their assessments is strongly in question. As shitty as the modern peer review process is, its essence is vital for the progress of modern science.
BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 5 months ago
As someone who’s had a paper sitting with a journal since August I can understand the motivation.