García-Romero, AntonioEstrada, José M.Rodríguez-Vallejo, José M.2011-11-292011-11-292011Ed 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).978-90-817527-0-1https://hdl.handle.net/10016/1266413th Conference of the international Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. Durban, South Africa. July 4-7, 2011.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.application/pdfengAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 Españaconference proceedingsEconomíaopen access