Catégories
EN

Opening Pandora’s box: Developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity through retracted articles

Author : Baraa Khuder

Retractions issued for misconduct offer a unique window into how questionable research is rhetorically constructed and made to appear credible. This study investigates how engaging with retracted articles can serve as a pedagogical tool for reviewer training, with particular attention to the rhetorical mechanisms through which unreliability is performed.

Twenty STEM doctoral researchers analyzed self-selected retracted papers using guided critical-reading questions to identify problematic rhetorical features. Across the analyses, five recurring issues emerged: intertextual falsification, methodological opacity, rhetorical inconsistency, rhetorical overstatement, and terminological distortion.

The findings indicate that this approach has the potential to raise doctoral students’ rhetorical sensitivity by enabling them to detect subtle markers of unreliability and to adopt a more evaluative rhetorical stance toward scholarly texts.

Retracted articles thus can provide an authentic pedagogical resource for developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity within doctoral education.

URL : Opening Pandora’s box: Developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity through retracted articles

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2025.2607681

 

Catégories
EN

A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of AI Policies in Academic Peer Review

Authors : Zhongshi Wang, Mengyue Gong

Rapid advances of artificial intelligence (AI) have substantially impacted the field of academic publishing. This study examines AI integration in peer review by analysing policies from 439 high- and 363 middle-impact factor (IF) journals across disciplines. Using grounded theory, we identify patterns in AI policy adoption.

Results show 83% of high-IF journals have AI guidelines, with varying stringency across disciplines. Meanwhile, only 75% of middle-IF journals have AI guidelines. Science, technology, and medicine (STM) disciplines exhibit stricter regulations, while humanities and social sciences adopt more lenient approaches.

Key ethical concerns focus on confidentiality risks, accountability gaps, and AI’s inability to replicate critical human judgement. Publisher policies emphasise transparency, human oversight, and restricted AI usage for auxiliary tasks only, such as grammar checks or reviewer finding.

Disciplinary differences highlight the need for tailored guidelines that balance efficiency gains with research integrity. This study proposes collaborative frameworks for responsible AI integration. It focuses on accountability, transparency, and interdisciplinary policy development to address peer review challenges.

URL : A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of AI Policies in Academic Peer Review

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.2035

Catégories
EN

And then a miracle occurs—a review of theory of change models for societal impact of research

Authors : Ole Henning Sørensen, Stine Dandanell Garn, Steffen Bohni Nielsen

Through an umbrella review, this article identified and surveyed 24 societal impact of research (SIR) models. Most of these models were developed within health domains and in Anglo-Saxon countries. The authors mapped the SIR models against constituent components of a robust theory of change.

The study found that logic models were predominantly used to conceive SIR models. Yet, only nine models had explicit causal links, and only two made explicit assumptions about why research contributes to societal change.

The old proverb among evaluators—when using theories of change to describe change—“and then a miracle occurs…,” rings uncomfortably true to the current state of SIR theorizing. Further theorizing and conceptual clarity are needed to advance the science of research impact.

URL : And then a miracle occurs—a review of theory of change models for societal impact of research

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaf057

 

Catégories
EN

The Drain of Scientific Publishing

Authors : Fernanda Beigel, Dan Brockington, Paolo Crosetto, Gemma Derrick, Aileen Fyfe, Pablo Gomez Barreiro, Mark A. Hanson, Stefanie Haustein, Vincent Larivière, Christine Noe, Stephen Pinfield, James Wilsdon

The domination of scientific publishing in the Global North by major commercial publishers is harmful to science.

We need the most powerful members of the research community, funders, governments and Universities, to lead the drive to re-communalise publishing to serve science not the market.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.04820

Catégories
EN

The Modal Mode of Thinking about Scholarly Publishing

Author : Jefferson Pooley

The essay argues that the study of scholarly communication would benefit from attending to a “modal” sensibility—that is, a self-conscious sensitivity to the differences that different mediums make in understanding published works of scholarship.

The essay critiques the unreflective textualism that dominates the conversation on publishing. The claim is that the primacy of text, as the sovereign medium of academic communication, is a largely invisible parochialism.

The essay points to examples and traditions of multi-modal publishing as an entry point to taking the medium-specificity of publishing formats as an object of analysis. Such experimentation has followed, sometimes closely, the emergence of new mediums of storage and transmission within the societies that scholars work.

The mid-twentieth century birth of the modern medium concept made multi-modality a conceivable, self-conscious project. Even so, the discourse on academic publishing has rarely registered the implications, including for inherited text-based formats.

The essay concludes with a call for media scholars, curiously underrepresented in the discourse, to take up this task, with reference to pioneering works in the field.

URL : The Modal Mode of Thinking about Scholarly Publishing

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3998/jep.8757

Catégories
FR

The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 30 ans dans la vie des communautés académiques

Autrice/Author : Chérifa Boukacem-Zeghmouri

L’anniversaire d’une revue savante est toujours un moment important. Avant tout, pour son comité éditorial, et aussi pour la communauté scientifique et professionnelle qui se réunit autour du titre et qui se nourrit de ses contenus. C’est un point d’étape qui permet de faire un pas de côté afin d’appréhender ce qui a été réalisé, ce qui est en cours de conception et ce qui reste toujours à accomplir.

URL : The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 30 ans dans la vie des communautés académiques

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3998/jep.8311

Catégories
EN

Regaining Scientific Authority in a Post-Truth Landscape

Authors : Andrew M. Petzold, Marcia D. Nichols

Recent decades have seen a rise of anti-science rhetoric, fueled by scientific scandals and failures of peer review, and the rise of trainable generative AI spreading misinformation. We argue, moreover, that the continued erosion of scientific authority also arises from inherent features in science and academia, including a reliance on publication as a method for gaining professional credibility and success.

Addressing this multifaceted challenge necessitates a concerted effort across several key areas: strengthening scientific messaging, combating misinformation, rebuilding trust in scientific authority, and fundamentally rethinking academic professional norms.

Taking these steps will require widespread effort, but if we want to rebuild trust with the public, we must make significant and structural changes to the production and dissemination of science.

URL : Regaining Scientific Authority in a Post-Truth Landscape

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13040065