“
Why is it that "hello" is repeatedly banned? How to make academic review clean?
”
Text丨 and return
Scientific research integrity is the foundation of academic research and scientific and technological innovation, but many researchers "say hello" in the relevant process, resulting in "cat and mouse family" and "collusion" between scientific research project applicants and review experts. Recently, the National Natural Science Foundation of China issued the "2024 Notification of the Results of Misconduct Cases (Second Batch)", which dealt with the subjects involved in ten related scientific research misconduct cases.
Among them, the case of Liu Jianni, a university teacher in Shaanxi, is eye-catching. She "greeted" the reviewers when applying for the project, and after she became a reviewer, she revealed her identity and provided assistance to others, and the relevant scientific research projects were revoked and the allocated funds were recovered. It should be said that such cases have a certain typicality.
The "greeting" of the applicants of scientific research projects and the "greeting" of review experts are regarded as a "stubborn disease" by the Natural Science Foundation of China, and special rectification work has been carried out, which shows the seriousness of the problem. This shows that there are indeed some scientific researchers who strive for scientific research projects by "greeting", and after they become review experts, they "return the favor", and even form an "offensive and defensive alliance", which interferes with and affects the integrity of scientific research and the academic atmosphere.
On October 12, the website of the National Natural Science Foundation of China published the "2024 Notification of the Handling Results of Misconduct Cases (Second Batch)".
"Relationship", "favor" and "face" intrude on the peer review system
In traditional societies, people pay attention to the differences between internal and external personal relationships and intimacy, and carry out social interactions based on personal relationships. As a "small society", the academic world is not an ivory tower in a vacuum, but will also be influenced and influenced by the social atmosphere. Scientific researchers are not ignorant of the fireworks of the world, and they are also unavoidable in terms of human relationships.
Such a formal system as the peer review system is conducive to ensuring the specificity, independence and impartiality of academic review, and is the fundamental system for the independent operation of the scientific and technological community. However, the peer review system is also plagued by informal rules such as "relationship", "favor" and "face", and it is often difficult to conduct reviews based on academic potential and quality.
At present, the competition for scientific research project applications is becoming increasingly fierce, and the funding rate of various "national brand" scientific research projects has decreased significantly, which often means that one out of ten or even one out of a hundred. Many applicants for research projects want not to "say hello" or "ask for help", but they are worried that other competitors will do so and put themselves at a competitive disadvantage. As a result, they often take the risk of contacting experts who may be involved in the review in the hope of gaining their support.
The identities of project applicants and review experts are relative, and review experts will also apply for scientific research projects, and dare not offend their peers or show mercy. Although some of the judges are very reluctant to say hello, sometimes it is difficult to refuse due to embarrassment. At the same time, if the personal identity information of the reviewers is not properly protected during the project review process, they will also have scruples and dare not conduct fair reviews.
In recent years, the administrative burden of applying for and reviewing scientific research projects has been reduced, and the learning costs, compliance costs and psychological costs encountered by researchers in the process of applying and reviewing projects have decreased significantly. However, the human burden and relationship cost of scientific research project application and review have not been significantly reduced, which also makes the situation of "greeting" still exist.
If the unhealthy trend of "greeting each other" cannot be effectively curbed, then scientific researchers will have to devote a lot of time and energy to maintaining relationships, and carry out unnecessary and harmful "relationships", "visiting the docks", and "going through the back door". If "greetings" are left unchecked, in the long run, the academic community will be full of mountains and miasma. Let scientific research, which should be valued, not get the attention it deserves.
Protect and encourage complaints from scientific researchers, and strengthen information sharing
As early as 2020, the Ministry of Science and Technology issued the "Regulations on the Handling of Solicitation in the Evaluation of Scientific and Technological Activities (Trial)", which clearly prohibits the solicitation of entrustment. Why is it that "hello" is repeatedly banned? How to make academic review clean?
Similar problems also exist to varying degrees in the fields of government procurement and bidding, resulting in problems such as "bid-rigging" and "collusion" from time to time. In recent years, the establishment of the public resource trading center and the improvement of related systems have gradually promoted sunshine procurement and fair competition.
From the perspective of dealing with academic misconduct such as "greetings", scientific research funding institutions and science and technology management departments need to dare to "show their swords" against unfair academic evaluation, and play a strong deterrent role by publicly disclosing relevant problems and typical cases.
"Greetings" are often carried out in private, with a certain degree of concealment, and are often difficult to detect in time. This also means protecting and encouraging researchers to report and complain, and providing clues for investigating and dealing with violations.
It is worth noting that the Natural Science Foundation of China not only announces the personnel who have been dealt with for "greeting", but also shares its relevant information with other ministries and commissions and local science and technology management departments, and implements joint disciplinary action through the scientific research integrity management information system. This will help shape a broader governance landscape that allows academic misconduct to go undetected and increases penalties through joint disciplinary action.
Of course, it is necessary not only to strengthen cross-departmental information sharing, but also to strengthen international research integrity collaboration. In recent years, some researchers have been retracted for papers published in international journals, which also shows the need to broaden the global network for building scientific research integrity. As a global science and technology power, China also needs to participate in the construction of a global scientific research integrity cooperation mechanism to promote the improvement of the country's scientific and technological innovation strength.
Many researchers lack training in scientific research integrity, and are often overwhelmed by what exactly is allowed and prohibited. Therefore, it is also necessary to further promote training and education on scientific research integrity, advocate and carry forward the spirit of scientists, and enable scientific research personnel to keep themselves clean. (The author is a researcher at the National Institute of Development and Strategy and a professor at the School of Public Administration, Renmin University, Chinese)
Editor|Wang Lei
Typesetting|Gan Qiongfang
The Paper Commentary's exclusive manuscript shall not be reproduced without authorization