Research in the second Elizabethan era: A platinum age for the Commonwealth and the UK

From physical empires of the past to information and virtual empires in the modern era, the last 70 years have borne witness to astonishing change in both research and science and how they are communicated. But where have these shifts occurred, and what do they tell us about the future? And what will be the legacy of Elizabeth II’s long-lasting reign for science and technology?

In the UK, Commonwealth countries, and around the world, people have mourned the passing of Queen Elizabeth II. For many, she will be remembered as a dedicated public servant who gave her support to charities and good causes, raising their profile and giving them a voice that helped them to be noticed in the world. For a good deal more than half a century, successive Prime Ministers have regarded her as a giver of context and a provider of a safe space to air concerns and discuss the challenges of the day that they could share with no one else. She has been widely recognised as a constant in our lives and, by some, as the embodiment of all things British in a changing age. An instantly recognisable figure, the Queen has played the role of an observer of that change, unable to be actively involved in politics but having privileged access to politicians, celebrities and changemakers globally during a period of great change.

Billboard in Piccadilly Circus displaying a tribute to Queen Elizabeth II.
Billboard in London’s Piccadilly Circus displaying a tribute to Queen Elizabeth II.
Image credit: Ocean Outdoor.

In this brief commemoration in honour of Her Majesty, we wanted to reflect on the changes in research and, in particular, in scientific research that have characterised the modern Elizabethan era. The Queen was crowned in the same year that Watson and Crick (with the significant help of Franklin) published their paper on the double helix structure of DNA in 1953. Over the intervening 70 years, the UK has not only remained at the forefront of research, but has made contributions that have been key to shaping the emerging exponential industrial revolution. From Sir Tim Berner-Lee’s pioneering work around the World Wide Web in the late 1980s, to the London-based DeepMind team who solved the protein-folding problem with AlphaFold, the UK has been the home to some of the greatest scientific advances of the late 20th and early 21st Centuries.

Like her great-great-grandmother Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth married a man who had great interest in, and who consequently was a great supporter of, science and technology. The Victorian era is one that is remembered not only for empire but also for innovation and its technological contribution to the world, and we suggest that the second Elizabethan era will be viewed similarly in this respect. In 1952, the UK produced around 2% of the world’s research output and the broader Commonwealth of Nations, with which the Queen is so intimately related, around 3%. As of 2021, the UK produces around 4% global research and, together with other Commonwealth countries, around 14%.

The influence of the Commonwealth on the world stage often goes unseen but network effects are powerful in today’s world.  Figure 1 shows relative global influence on research of each country or set of countries using a technique that we’ve developed at Digital Science over the last few years based on the eigenvector centrality network measure. The core of the idea is that research volume and research citations only show a superficial picture of research strength. Research is becoming an increasingly collaborative pursuit and success is born of finding the right people with which to work. Eigenvector centrality calculated in the way shown here mixes volume, citation and level of collaboration into one metric that, we argue, is an interesting proxy for influence. In the figure you can see that since 1952 the global influence of the US was strong in the 1950s and 1960s, but decreased in the 1970s and 1980s, stepping down once again in the 1990s and has gradually waned since the turn of the millennium.  On the other hand, China, which had little global research influence at all until the 1980s has grown significantly in the last three decades, overtaking the UK in the last few years.  

However, what is striking about Figure 1 is that the Commonwealth has not only established a solid foundation of global research influence (doubtless due to its large “surface area”, with 56 countries collaborating globally), but that it has also begun growing significantly in its influence in the last 20 years. Of course, when the Queen originally became the Head of the Commonwealth, there were just 8 member states and hence their influence would have been even less than shown in the diagrams here. Our analysis follows the influence of the full current 56 member states throughout the life of the Queen’s reign. While the influence of this group may be unsurprising as it counts highly developed research economies such as Australia, Canada and New Zealand amongst its number, it should also be recognised that it is a disparate collection of countries that includes small and developing economies as well as large ones.

The spread of internet technologies (as mentioned above, an innovation that owes an important part of its lineage to the UK) has enabled smaller nations to play on the international stage of research – a distinct advantage for some Commonwealth-member countries who share a common set of values, language, and a legal system, that all facilitate collaboration. In the age of the internet, distance is no longer a barrier to these countries working together on research projects Hence, while the UK (separate from the Commonwealth) has generally waned in its international research influence, it is notable that it has been less susceptible than others such as the US and the EU to decline in influence.  We suggest that this is likely to be due to its strong ties with Commonwealth nations.

Eigenvector centrality.
Figure 1: Eigenvector centrality for US, China, UK, EU and the Commonwealth (not including the UK) from 1952 to 2021. The graph for each country or country grouping shows the influence of the research outputs of that country based on its co-authorship network. (Source: Dimensions.)

Over the modern Elizabethan era, the world has moved from an age of physical empires through the space race and the computer revolution to an age of information and virtual empires. From a political perspective, the UK relinquished its role as global power and instead needed to content itself with the role of influencer on the world stage. In an elegant parallel, the monarchy moved from being a “great Imperial family” to influencers both culturally and politically. The Queen’s personal style transcended the geopolitical zeitgeist as she lent her personal brand to long-term projects such as the Commonwealth.

By all accounts the Queen believed in the Commonwealth as a group of nations who could make positive change and she fought for that. In the case of research, as the US and EU gradually wane in their influence, it may well be that the Commonwealth has the collaborative spirit, as well as the geographical and cultural diversity to continue to influence the world positively. If true, this would be a worthy legacy for someone whose life was one of service.

About Dimensions

Part of Digital Science, Dimensions is a modern, innovative, linked research data infrastructure and tool, re-imagining discovery and access to research: grants, publications, citations, clinical trials, patents and policy documents in one place. www.dimensions.ai 

About the Authors

Daniel Hook
Daniel Hook
Simon Porter
Simon Porter

Daniel Hook, CEO | Digital Science

Daniel Hook is CEO of Digital Science, co-founder of Symplectic, a research information management provider, and of the Research on Research Institute (RoRI). A theoretical physicist by training, he continues to do research in his spare time, with visiting positions at Imperial College London and Washington University in St Louis.

Simon Porter, Director Innovation | Digital Science

Simon Porter has forged a career transforming university practices in how data about research is used, both from administrative and eResearch perspectives. As well as making key contributions to research information visualization, he is well known for his advocacy of Research Profiling Systems and their capability to create new opportunities for researchers.

The post Research in the second Elizabethan era: A platinum age for the Commonwealth and the UK appeared first on Digital Science.



from Digital Science https://ift.tt/ecm9K5A

International Research Awards on New Science Inventions

International Research Awards on New Science Inventions| Nomination are open don't miss this event.
Online Nomination: x-i.me/abdunews
Visi:nesi.sciencefather.com
Enquery:nesin@sciencefather.com






 

Inside Story: How a postgrad plagiarised at least 60 papers in huge publishing scam

To fall down a rabbit hole, in today’s usage, implies that while done voluntarily, the consequences are nightmarish, with all sorts of hazards and unintended consequences. While this differs to the original meaning from Lewis Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, as this New Yorker article spells out, there are corollaries that have only been discovered in today’s online-dependent world.

So, when Ripeta co-founder and CEO Leslie McIntosh described the start of her investigation of suspicious publication activity in March 2022 as being “interested in going down this rabbit hole”, she knew that while it would satisfy her curiosity as someone who had built a company on the basis of trying to improve science, it could also lead to some painful realisations as to how research and publications can go awry.

Back Story

The rabbit hole first appeared – as they so often do – in the shape of a tweet where an author had bemoaned the fact that a journal was ignoring the entreaties to act on a paper that had evidently plagiarised their own work. Over a year later, nothing had been done and so the author had taken to social media to air their concerns. After looking into the alleged plagiarism, Dr McIntosh found that the author in question – Mohammed Sabah Uddin – had published well over 100 papers while at Southeast University in Bangladesh before moving on more recently to Hong Kong University. Dr McIntosh’s suspicions were further raised by an acknowledgement in the suspect article from ‘Pharmakon Neuroscience’, which could not be verified in the GRID database maintained by parent company Digital Science

After completing a series of integrity checks using Ripeta’s technology, including cross-referencing co-authors and funding agencies, Dr McIntosh found a number of other similar acknowledgments of Pharmakon by using the Dimensions database, which contains full text searching suitable to support this type of forensic work.

Dr McIntosh explains: “The work myself and colleagues carry out is a way of protecting the academic record, and in so doing supports the increasing number of institutions, publishers, funders, and researchers who place research integrity at the heart of their approach to research.”

“As part of Ripeta’s work providing tools to highlight potential challenges to research and publication integrity principles, we will build a case study so key stakeholders can learn from this example. The work has also fed into Ripeta’s development of new solutions for research integrity.”

Analyses revealed other anomalies in Uddin’s publication record, such as:

  • A large number of articles published (130+) in a short time (from 2016-2021; source: Dimensions)
  • A high number of citations to those papers (2,000+)
  • A high number of verified reviews on Publons (300+).

Further details on Uddin’s publication record can be seen in the Appendix below.

These and other ‘trust markers’ led Dr McIntosh to consult Digital Science colleague Simon Linacre, who in addition to having 20 years’ experience in academic publishing, is also a Trustee of COPE with expertise in deceptive publishing practices. Confirming the findings of the investigation, it was time to approach the author himself.

“The work myself and colleagues carry out is a way of protecting the academic record, and in so doing supports the increasing number of institutions, publishers, funders, and researchers who place research integrity at the heart of their approach to research.”

Dr Leslie McIntosh, Founder and CEO, Ripeta

No Reply

In May 2022, Linacre used several verified email addresses to contact Uddin with a number of questions about the high volume of his articles and their similarities to other papers. Uddin was contacted three times to no avail, which is common when dealing with suspicious actors in the publishing environment. It was then decided to contact his current employer, which not only sparked an immediate response from HKU but also from Uddin himself, all on the same day. Apologising for not replying because earlier emails had gone into his email junk folder, scant details were supplied to the initial queries that had been raised. Further queries were sent to Uddin, this time copying in HKU, before the university announced a formal investigation.

The university acted quickly. After little more than a month following its investigation, HKU found evidence of improprieties on behalf of Uddin. It said he had admitted to copying 60 published papers out of a total of 180 published in the last few years – industrial-scale plagiarism made possible by using paraphrasing software to escape detection by anti-plagiarism tools. At this stage, it is still unclear how the other papers were written and published so quickly and which exact papers he authored legitimately. Overall, 90% of all articles published by Uddin are indexed in PubMed across more than 100 different journals and 10 different publishers. 

Soon after concerns were raised with HKU, Uddin’s publication history in his ORCiD profile significantly changed from populated to empty. All citations and references were deleted. In late June, HKU signalled their investigations had concluded. HKU informed Digital Science Uddin would withdraw from his PhD program at the university, effective on 1st August.

Speaking on behalf of HKU, Professor Danny Chan, Director (Education and Development of Research Integrity) said: “Upholding research integrity has always been, and will continue to be, our top priority. Any breach of trust is not only detrimental to our career, but also to the funders and the academic world. We strive to ensure our students and colleagues are putting this commitment in daily practice.“ 

Looking Ahead

Since the story was published in Retraction Watch on 25 August, a number of enquiries have been made about other aspects of the case. Who was the author in question? Why did they plagiarise so many articles? Could more have been done to identify what was going on earlier?

As Dr McIntosh commented on the Retraction Watch article when someone asked about Uddin’s acceptance into a PhD program at HKU: “This means the university must have access to both a database with all the publications and a means to disambiguate the author’s name. If anything, it shows the cracks in our current ecosystem and that HKU is willing to improve.”

To ponder too much on the motivations of an individual author can risk overlooking the systemic issues in play that can drive researchers into going to extreme lengths to develop a stacked CV. The proverbial ‘publish or perish’ culture still persists in many research environments, and it is unlikely Uddin is the first to use new tools such as paraphrasing software to pad out their publishing record. The good news is that in addition to Ripeta’s existing solutions, it is developing new tools and integrations that have been aided by the Uddin investigation which should help institutions and publishers head off such problems in the future. The bad news is, however, that as part of the investigations into Uddin, they necessitated several other ‘rabbit holes’ in the shape of co-authors and other articles acknowledging Pharmakon support. There is still a long way to go before Alice hits the bottom of this particular rabbit hole, and it is unlikely to end up anywhere like Wonderland.

Appendix

Md. Sahab Uddin Publications per Dimensions (by citations)

Md. Sahab Uddin’s Publications Citations per Dimensions*

Publication Year

2017

2016

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

GRAND TOTAL

Unique DOIs

17

12

9

21

35

34

6

134

Sum of Times Cited

181

101

176

837

571

132

1

1999

* This is the number of publications Ripeta identified with just the author’s name and the number of citations to papers during that year.

Simon Linacre

About the Author

Simon Linacre, Head of Content, Brand & Press | Digital Science

Simon has worked in scholarly publishing for almost 20 years. His background is in journalism, and he has been published in academic journals on the topics of bibliometrics, publication ethics and research impact.

The post Inside Story: How a postgrad plagiarised at least 60 papers in huge publishing scam appeared first on Digital Science.



from Digital Science https://ift.tt/iKyJzhu

Featured Post

Prof. Dr. Thomas Braunbeck | University of Heidelberg, Germany | Best Researcher Award

  International Research Awards on New Science Inventions Join us for the International Research Awards on New Science Inventions, a premie...

Popular