Some journal articles on the Taylor & Francis website now bear a pop-up notification stating the papers are “currently under investigation.”
The publisher began adding the notices to articles such as this one in June, according to a spokesperson, as a way to inform readers about an ongoing investigation “so that they can exercise appropriate caution when considering the research presented.”
Like the “editor’s notes” posted on Springer Nature articles under investigation, Taylor & Francis’ pop-ups only appear on the publisher’s website, not in databases where researchers might be searching for papers.
The company’s publishing ethics and integrity team decides which articles it’s investigating get such a notification and when, according to a new web page describing the process.
“The pop-up will be added on a case-by-case basis where there are significant concerns about the academic integrity of an article,” the spokesperson said:
This will be particularly valuable in cases with a risk of harm, such as when medical decisions could be made based on the research article under investigation. The notification is less likely to be used where the issues raised are quite minor or before we have assessed the credibility of concerns submitted by a third party. As we have only recently started to label some articles in this way, we continue to test our criteria for doing so and will adjust as and when necessary.
The publisher’s website states the pop-up notifications are temporary, appearing only while the investigation is ongoing, as opposed to permanent notices like expressions of concern, retractions, or corrections.
Because formal expressions of concern “remain on the scholarly record permanently,” according to Sabina Alam, director of Publishing Ethics & Integrity at Taylor & Francis, “they can only really be used when an investigation has established very strong grounds for concern, typically several months after we first identify a potential problem.”
“This new ‘under investigation’ notification will keep readers informed earlier in the process and enable us to remove the message once the investigation has been completed, whatever conclusion it comes to,” Alam said in a statement.
Other publishers add expressions of concern or other notices to papers while undertaking investigations that could take some time to resolve. Science, for example, has begun adding such notices after learning of problems with papers and then later rescinding them when publishing corrections.
Scientific sleuths who report concerns with papers to publishers such as Taylor & Francis had mixed reactions to the new notifications.
“I think it is a good development,” Elisabeth Bik said. “I welcome any ‘flag’ on a paper for which serious concerns were raised, and the sooner after the concerns were raised, the better.”
Bik suggested the publisher add a time stamp to the notification, as well as more detail about what aspect of the paper the publisher was investigating.
Rene Aquarius agreed the notifications would be better with a short statement about what the publisher was investigating or a link to PubPeer. He also suggested Taylor & Francis somehow notify readers of the outcome of an investigation. But he called the pop-ups “a fantastic development” for “increased transparency.”
“I wish all publishers would follow their example,” Aquarius said.
Kevin Patrick said he had difficulty seeing the notifications because he uses ad blockers. If the flags don’t end up in databases, “they have a limited audience,” he said, only for people looking at articles on the publisher’s website.
“Meh,” he said. “Certainly it is better than nothing.”
Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution 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].
“Kevin Patrick said he had difficulty seeing the notifications because he uses ad blockers.”
He’s right. I had to disable every privacy-related extension before I could see the popup on the linked article. It’s not implemented very well.
But like he said, “better than nothing.”
Perhaps it depends on the type of adblocker and browser? I use AdGuard in Chrome, but I can see the notice at the bottom-right corner of the page as an expandable flag.
This can be abused. Frivolous complaints by rival academics competing for tenure could flood the journal and stop up the review process.
How about posting a screenshot of the Taylor and Francis popup alert in the article so readers can understand how minimally helpful it is. It’s a small blue/purple box in the corner of my browser that lacks salience.
Adblock and other browser extensions made it tricky for me to see it. You may want to consider posting more images in your articles.
Does this paragraph need to be in quotes? It’s a quote from a spokesperson and I got confused by the “we” in it because of the lack of quotes…
This will be particularly valuable in cases with a risk of harm, such as when medical decisions could be made based on the research article under investigation. The notification is less likely to be used where the issues raised are quite minor or before we have assessed the credibility of concerns submitted by a third party. As we have only recently started to label some articles in this way, we continue to test our criteria for doing so and will adjust as and when necessary.
Fixed — thanks.