A SAGE journal has retracted 122 papers because of “clear indicators that the submission and/or peer review process for these papers was manipulated.”
Those indicators, according to The International Journal of Electrical Engineering & Education:
include but are not limited to submission patterns consistent with the use of paper mills, collusion between authors and reviewers during the review process, inappropriate subject matter as compared to the Journal’s Aims and Scope, poor quality peer review and requests for inappropriate citation.
A look at the first three titles suggests that they were, indeed, far out of scope:
- Research on the evolution of urban design from the perspective of public health under the background of the COVID-19
- The rationality of physical fitness evaluation index for cardiorespiratory fitness in medical system
- Role of foreign direct investment – As a strategic move towards growth, economic integration and development
The retractions join more than 600 others for being likely paper mill products just this year, according to our records. Retraction Watch readers know that paper mills have been a frequent subject of coverage.
Update, 1330 UTC, 12/19/21: SAGE is also subjecting 318 papers to expressions of concern — and has fired the editor of the journal, it said in a statement:
On December 15th 2021, SAGE retracted 122 articles where there are clear indicators that the submission and/or peer review process was manipulated. SAGE also added expression of concern notices to an additional 318 articles while it continues its investigation. Further editorial action will be taken where appropriate, including articles undergoing full re-review and potential additional retractions.
The Editor-in-Chief’s contract has been terminated and Associate Editor access has been revoked for a further six individuals who have also been removed from the Editorial Board. While the investigation is ongoing, all unpublished submissions have been returned to their authors and the journal is closed to new submissions. We will provide further information once the investigation is complete.
Hat tip: Smut Clyde
Like Retraction Watch? You can make a one-time tax-deductible contribution by PayPal or by Square, or a monthly tax-deductible donation by Paypal to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].
How these papers published? The editors of the journal, the publisher are both responsible.
Publisher should compensate the authors of the retractions.
I am not sure you can compensate someone for submitting a paper to a publication outlet that was never appropriate in the first place. In fact, it makes you wonder about the validity of their research work in a more general sense if they cannot adequately gauge a scientific outlet for their work …
A compensation would be a great idea.
Not to the authors, though, but to the libraries who subscribed to this trash.
The earliest retracted papers are from 2019, so the journal’s product had been contaminated for over 2 years.
Side note: it’s a pity SAGE do not publish editorial timelines for papers (received – revised – accepted dates), so we can’t analyze how these evolved.
Is IJEEE! the correct exclamation for when that happens?
QED!
In many journals, various ‘publishing cliques’ operate.
The peer reviewers can be very biased and let through only papers that quote them and certainly never those that contradict their own publications. Astonishing that anything new is ever published!
Thé name of a leading author, some kind of a professor , is often inserted only to get the paper published.
It was a systematic and planned corruption. In the past two years, the number of papers of the journal was suddenly tripled and so has its impact factor. It is unlikely that suddenly people got interested to publish there.
I am not sure if I can embed images in the comments. If they didn’t show, here are the links
https://exaly.com/journal/14890/international-journal-of-electrical-engineering-education/articles
https://exaly.com/journal/14890/international-journal-of-electrical-engineering-education/
How can Sage not be complicit in this? At the very least, they must have looked the other way just to get more content behind their pay-wall — now they’re playing “Captain Renault” (with apology to Bogie) to IJEEE’s “Rick.”
Is ijeee is going to be listed in SCI
Did they open further investigation to identify the gullible editors that made this thing happen? And if so, did they sack the person? I expect the publisher to be more transparent in this regard.