Comments on: Why doctors who pretend to write journal articles should be punished https://ethicalnag.org/2011/10/26/medical-ghostwriting-fraudulent-authors/ Marketing Ethics for the Easily Swayed Mon, 05 Nov 2018 12:51:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Dr. J. https://ethicalnag.org/2011/10/26/medical-ghostwriting-fraudulent-authors/comment-page-1/#comment-414138 Sat, 10 Oct 2015 15:52:04 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=7276#comment-414138 […] Why doctors who pretend to write journal articles should be punished […]

Like

]]> By: Carolyn Thomas https://ethicalnag.org/2011/10/26/medical-ghostwriting-fraudulent-authors/comment-page-1/#comment-20741 Fri, 18 Nov 2011 03:29:24 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=7276#comment-20741 Thanks for this – I think! As this paper concludes: “…We found that self-citation was not rare in the reviewed journals, an observation that is likely true for the majority, if not all, of scientific journals.” Sigh . . . I too am guilty of Eigenlob whenever I include a link to something I’ve written here previously. The difference: I don’t get more money, promoted, tenured, or attract future funding grants the more I cite myself. Academic researchers do.

Like

]]> By: cave76 https://ethicalnag.org/2011/10/26/medical-ghostwriting-fraudulent-authors/comment-page-1/#comment-20708 Thu, 17 Nov 2011 14:26:29 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=7276#comment-20708 In more or less the same vein—– don’t forget Eigenlob.

“The number of citations to previous work of an individual scientist has been considered, in part, to be an important indicator of academic performance in research. Some of these citations, of course, are to the author’s own work; the Germans call this “Eigenlob,” or self-praise.”

Like

]]> By: Carolyn Thomas https://ethicalnag.org/2011/10/26/medical-ghostwriting-fraudulent-authors/comment-page-1/#comment-20096 Wed, 02 Nov 2011 13:26:56 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=7276#comment-20096 I agree, St. Pete’s – does this mean students will soon have carte blanche to plagiarize class assignments from now on, too?

Like

]]> By: St. Pete's https://ethicalnag.org/2011/10/26/medical-ghostwriting-fraudulent-authors/comment-page-1/#comment-20087 Wed, 02 Nov 2011 03:46:20 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=7276#comment-20087 Let’s call a spade a spade, indeed. This kind of FRAUD would not be tolerated if their students claimed to be the authors of assignments that others had written – so why do these white tower academics get away with this?

Like

]]> By: Carolyn Thomas https://ethicalnag.org/2011/10/26/medical-ghostwriting-fraudulent-authors/comment-page-1/#comment-19776 Thu, 27 Oct 2011 12:49:50 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=7276#comment-19776 Thanks for that link, Dr. Joe. I found this line interesting:
“They found no change in the prevalence of honorary authors relative to 1996…”
So it seems that just as many academics today see nothing wrong with fraudulently claiming to be the actual authors of journal articles. The pressure of Publish or perish is still alive and well.
Cheers,
C.

Like

]]> By: Dr Joe https://ethicalnag.org/2011/10/26/medical-ghostwriting-fraudulent-authors/comment-page-1/#comment-19771 Thu, 27 Oct 2011 08:21:13 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=7276#comment-19771 This remains a major issue. A story also out today shows 1 in 5 papers are still ghost written.

Like

]]>