Referees Often Miss Obvious Errors in Computer and Electronic Publications

Abstract

Misconduct is extensive and damaging. So-called science is prevalent. Articles resulting from so-called science are often cited in other publications. This can have damaging consequences for society and for science. The present work includes a scientometric study of 350 articles (published by the Association for Computing Machinery; Elsevier; The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.; John Wiley; Springer; Taylor & Francis; and World Scientific Publishing Co.). A lower bound of 85.4% articles are found to be incongruous. Authors cite inherently self-contradictory articles more than valid articles. Incorrect informational cascades ruin the literature's signal-to-noise ratio even for uncomplicated cases.