Publication: Anatomy of scientific misconduct. Bibliotmetric analysis of the "Deja Vu" database
Loading...
Identifiers
Publication date
2011
Defense date
Advisors
Tutors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics
Leiden University
University of Zululand
Leiden University
University of Zululand
Impact
Export
Abstract
Scientific misconduct is a worrying problem whose incidence is increasing due to the increasingly competitive
research environment in many countries. Deja Vu is a publicly available database of highly similar citations
identified by eTBLAST from PubMed. We performed a bibliometric analysis of 116 pairs of duplicated
publications whose earlier papers were published in the period 2004-2005. We selected all the cases that have
been confirmed by experts. Our aim was to determine to what extent the duplicates with shared authors (SA) are
different from those with different authors (DA) in terms of citations and other relevant variables. To this extent,
we hope to contribute to a better understanding of the scientific misconduct problem. Our results reveal that
there is a clear differentiation between the two types of publications. In the case of papers with different authors,
the duplicates received fewer citations than the duplicates with shared authors. Moreover, the DA duplicates are
published with a delay of two years on average, one year more than that for SA duplicates. This pattern suggests
that fraudulent scientists try to hide their scientific misconduct.
Description
13th Conference of the international Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. Durban, South Africa. July 4-7, 2011.
Keywords
Bibliographic citation
Ed Noyons, Patrick Ngulube and Jacqueline Leta (Eds.), (2011). Proceedings of ISSI 2011. The 13th Conference of International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics: Vol. 1. (pp. 206-211).