A recent study has reignited debate on the state of scientific publishing by revealing the alarming scale at which fake papers are entering the scholarly record. These findings have intensified long-standing concerns about the monetization of research outputs, the pressures of metric-driven careers, and the vulnerabilities of peer review. Against this backdrop, questions about the governance of publishing and the integrity of science have taken on new urgency.
About the authors:
The monetization of scientific publishing by commercial publishers is immensely profitable. As there is no market mechanism to control prices, commercial publishers extract as much funding as the research system will bear, to the detriment of science and the public.
Researchers freely donate the copyright to their research articles to journal publishers and their time as reviewers in exchange for recognition by their employers, usually universities, while the costs are borne by employers or research funders. Publisher paywalls deny access to researchers in poorly funded research systems and to the citizens whose taxes have paid for the research in the first place, all at a time when science is more vital than ever to the future.
As researchers rely on publications to advance their careers, they are increasingly dependent on publication counts and various metrics, which can tempt them to cut corners. Publishers, in turn, may exploit this dependence, profiting from this pressure on researchers.
The absence of a price control mechanism offers such profitable pickings that so-called predatory publishers cut costs by dispensing with significant editorial control. Further steps in monetization have potentially devastating consequences for the credibility of science, when unethical publishers provide fake science in fake papers. These papers can be readily fabricated using large language models and academics simply pay for this imitation of scientific production for the benefit of their careers.
These developments move us on from a situation where commercial publishing is globally inequitable and inefficient due to the limited circulation of scientific results to institutions or regions able to pay excessive prices, to one where the integrity and trustworthiness of science is at stake, all at a time when science faces mounting political pressures and intensifying scrutiny. The market in research reputation has also encouraged an explosion of scientific publishing and exposed the limitations of pre-publication peer review, with demands for unpaid reviewers far exceeding the supply, thereby undermining one of the supposed pillars of science. The alternative of post-publication review is well established, and major science funders such as the Gates Foundation now avoid expensive and restrictive commercial publishers in their grant schemes.
It is now essential that the scientific community and its institutions – the universities, academies, unions, associations, international representative bodies and funders – address the crucial issues of governance of scientific publishing. It is those institutions and their evaluation practices that play a central role in applying the incentives that result in these damaging outcomes.
The International Science Council (ISC) recognizes the scale and seriousness of these challenges and the urgent need for coordinated system-wide action. Since 2019, the ISC has supported the reform of scientific publishing and monitored global developments in research assessment.
Recognizing the deep links between publishing and the assessment of science, the ISC has now launched the Forum on Publishing and Research Assessment to align reform agendas, bring together the diverse actors needed to tackle shared problems, and address the central issue of governance.
The Forum aims to bring together key actors who shape research incentives that reward quantity over quality thereby stimulating the production of fake science. It will map the “incentive chain” that stimulates misconduct and questionable research, and identify the changes needed to foster rigor, transparency, and trustworthiness.
This work is central to the ISC’s mission to be the global voice for science.
Picture by Christa Dodoo on Unsplash
Read more about ISC Forum on Publishing and Research Assessment 
Read more about New Steering Group appointed to guide the ISC Forum on Publishing and Research Assessment 
Read more about UN Scientific Advisory Board adopts landmark statement on Open Science 
Read more about Open Science round-up: The future of knowledge and who should control it 