The ethics of scientific writing – How to write and how not to write a paper

Just another WordPress site

The ethics of scientific writing – How to write and how not to write a paper

good news for analytical chemistry will be and maybe we have to plan for another lecture Indian and I would like to see you directv but because it’s between semesters and then there was is a short vacation for carnival anyway see you here it’s also a big pleasure and that’s the biggest pleasure you’re a Christian here with us today well his name is familiar to you chemistry activist year and he was professor Washington in trouble and the so you will make out many beasts publications but apart from anything else is recently issued seventh edition of his book chemistry so it has many other several articles before spectrophotometry of chromatography he’s being involved or his really key person in some technical and scientific developments like to flow injection analysis and so you have the opportunity of going back after his lecture in heaven people look in this curriculum and so I just and i would spend much time and just a few references and first Gary recent has had several Wars his liver of japan society chemistry it has enough another PhD degree university thailand a junkie scientific honor award medal the american chemical society fisher awarded chemistry and good analytical chemistry can american chemical society visually beautiful capture Award for Excellence in teaching Medal of Honor from university we do sell current book measure of charting diversity from a liquid metal just moves and metal probe economy must eat so on and so forth Justin just a few so chemistry actually I should say what I was improved in a questionnaire and we found out when I was representing the watch miss chemical society European Federation of chemical society we carried on the expression air and we get this year his book was the most cited most used by European universities was the most common to actually fascinating flooded with a petal that he was quite surprised so he’s the most common reference book to European universities in analytical chemistry and and apart from them also for 20 years is being the editor-in-chief talented journal in which services are publishing the topics that could be presented today could be various ways we could choose among several and we hope to have to forget this seriously stop joking because we have a house full and we want another opportunity PCC areas there are plans of testicle efficient to can again modular not only to work with us that without colleagues from other universities as well and to other meetings so it was a happy coincidence that i came across the opportunity of developing some work with the pacific region recently I visited him in Seattle and now I’m pleased to be able to have this opportunity of having invited professor for a small presentation we called it as a group seminar because as I said we were not expecting and that many people would be around the building today so we’ll leave the door open so that let’s get like a sauna

seventh edition and it’s it’s time to me and when i arrived at hear back from seattle at home I realized I knew I the previous edition I thought maybe the third or fourth in media and have the third or fourth but when I got here I realized I had the six also start by putting things so we were going magazine when every bet that you I signed lease copy for you must have been a new analysis in salamanca we would have included days so I have to copy signed by verification which i think is not very common today I’m pleased with so please professor get official we are happy to see opportunities we thank you for having come in for the trouble and we’ll enjoy your visit certainly my pleasure beer I never had a standing room only for Jeffrey yo chair so as some a dimension I’ve been editor-in-chief of plaintiff over 20 years on 25 years by the time I Cosby how to write a paper how much write a paper christening families okay so publications are force without how we communicate the work we’ve done spread our knowledge of how scientists are evaluated and there were quick to tell promotions or scientists are dependent on on scientific achievements so forth it’s not about how much your parish if epics a scientific writing is is important and and so talk about some of the good the bad and it’s become a more of a problem for editors these days these days of electronic age fourteen cases so easily purposely or accidentally so I’ll give you some examples so we worry about plagiarism what is the best use of other people’s work without technology and calling for a loop something is more common is so pleasure where you may and copy works from your prior publications and not cite that part of out of it and that’s fairly common so this is journal Vanity for many years and we have met several associate editor editor pro editors I hope co-editor-in-chief excel Michelle Kaufman and he has my description from Europe and I and then we have editor switch that from South America Africa Middle East Germans wait up general one half of China without he literally two thousand a year and I got it off from here mckelvey a couple years ago I was getting cooked five hundred papers a year so I got him talk about that you got a two hundred I’ve stood back reform but and so so we had wrestled on our ra tard time guerrillas idiot issue so we have a favorite cheer cabbage so I’m talking about how you should start you know this but I’ll Phyllis way I you start your paper tell stories actually near do you can tell a story i’ll tell you some juice don’t how do prepare review peer reviews actually for your advantage as well as for the energy and it’d be a better product and so talk some about safe plagiarism about duplication about plagiarism itself fabrication and i’ll talk about the biggest fraud case in chemistry that make a lot of dress that I was having involved with and some about reviewer responsibility what we viewers so the first thing you should do is read the ancient scope of the journal is this the right going to publish and so you read our agents cope we say we’re not looking for routine stuff that’s been published before and you should have a whole series of similar article should have a more complete article if you can’t so forth to challenge the editors or just to read the extra scope of the term we often get papers that have nothing to do so we’re not looking for cookbook chemistry there’s absolutely nothing wrong with perfect chemistry in fact that’s why we learn research we want to develop methods to use and so that’s really the perfect a lot more work but that’s not we’re looking for and first black journal cookbook chemistry this

well known as where you can publish so the first thing that’s in the paper is the abstract and thank you last right but that should be brief to the point to give the principal the method you talk about and it should include a summary of the important results you figures of merit raise your measurement detection limits Precision’s what sample is vama this is not an introduction to your work this is not going justified what we’re doing this particular summary of your results so the introduction is is where you start telling your story I tell students that the first sentence in a paper the large one right why because you have to get clear your mind how you can structure the paper so much you’re right and kept at your money right % & yard away so you’re going to tell a story same way this work is important work what problem are you addressing what’s been done in the past don’t know the literature give the relevant relative references and sometimes people don’t how are you advanced in the steady neo and don’t say that prior work is no good because those others may become to reviewers sometime and so I like the last sentence in the introduction sort of say 117 what you’re doing what what what is your study to put it in context for the reader experimental courses where you put information that somebody can repeat your work so you might provide you chemical source of the chemical simplification and so forth the procedures that you’re using if you’re relying on prior literature for some of your procedure site incitement there’s also discussion this is sort of the meat of your story now we’re going to tell you what when we’re done and again it should be succinct and clear give the base of your method I’ll often get a paper that has a new reagent for something that works beautifully but they don’t say the way they started it ye to think what’s going to work give some background quiet during the study and you should open organized by topic sigh like some pennies that makes it easier to see what you’ve done use tables and figures of course to help summarize some your results figures of course are very good to have you don’t want to have too many of them so many people or just reproduce their whole notebook a figure that cut down a little bit don’t use straight lines we prefer just using these square points and our squared values and so forth and don’t yours too many figures sometimes you might combine the information to figures into one support make care of comparison tissues again tables don’t put in too too too much data we just want have enough that we can say you somebody can rebooting you introduce your results and gets in New York you have and pay attention two significant figures sometimes will get with computers these days a calculation will spit out 10 figures and some people report 10 figures that tells me they don’t really have a good grasp from fitting and how accurate precise third method but he is and we want to decision standard deviations t-test and so forth conclusions it should not be a repeat of the abstract some people do that and often they’re not native but if you have a fairly detailed paper and lots of different results it’s a good that summarize what the key findings were in a conclusion section we of course rely on reviewers provide advice expert by some papers and but something made the editor to make conversation after i get reviews in most of you will review how maybe you have for you anchor2 before and you of course prefer to be ethical and so forth but not everybody if you’ll find out which weeks and papers and as easy as I say to slip up yourself and so play Drake if you’re not careful and especially as digital age so easy for for an unethical or lazy author to cut page copy others works without citing it for their own work we do ask reviewers to check prior work to be offered and there are different ways you do that and we their instructions through you you do ask them to do that and we give some sources like sciFinder scholar ScienceDirect Scopus and so forth we

check some people do that some don’t and shall review is not very good sometimes out there you is this good work no comment this is bad Republicans no comment that doesn’t help very much i’ll give you examples where reviewers have been key and keeping out at papers it also gives that’s what they did so some examples give the rationale for your work nor that of others and don’t ignore your own here’s an editorial got written several years ago and chemical engineering news by the editor of the organic process and he said he pointed out that authors deliberately don’t cite it competitors work why they don’t want that we do is to know that the competition and they may also neglect to mention their own work and the reason for that is that the work of summer pre-publication take that if you don’t excite your own work today it’s a little easier find anything down with into a purchase and so forth this is what we call something so some examples some reviews this this rigorous is not fear specification the authors have disregarded extensive research spent on this topic for the last decades there’s nothing reject don’t repeat your own work this reviewer says the authors published a quite summer paper in reference here and in the journal solely significant information which is we we accept that fate these are just few temple panels that’s workers similar several other papers from this group we jack so these are real good news and some of them free or here’s a circuit paper I got a few years ago I guess 1995’s room no no 2074 was a new reagent for tungsten six and the author claimed it was the best reagent in western counting six best sensitivity vessel activity and he’s using a benzo pirate one mental Iranian complex well I have to do a search on this offer and I found two papers that he just published recently using pendulum firing health factors but with a little different functional group honor that’s the only difference and she compared to three papers all the figures were identical the selectivities rectangle the sensitivities right so how can this be the best there is he’s already publishable so I didn’t have that that work with you what they find something’s out so bad publish and help people do things that publish that they do have badly don’t duplicate here is a series of papers this also published with the exact same title but with different add lines okay publishing typical Germans Evelyn chemical anta kamata and here’s one in an eternal chemistry and any Harvick so he’s grinding out papers you can send technique people do this and we have very novel original but he doesn’t and it turns out this paper that we published in flattered but formaldehyde had a figure in it that said Admiral and my friend sandy does Gupta generate a tactic she was an expert on / mounted from aldehyde read the paper and he saw that and get a search found this paper on Adeline and here are the figures in the two papers there’s the same alrighty Jesus ain’t AP right that’s understandable but and here’s the command of paper its lattice and here’s where the word Alan is it recaptured in the figure and here’s the alligator so the same figured but animals this is something the reviewers miss okay put in the energy if you compare the paint the figures in the two papers again he made up to paper someone here’s how sir published a paper colaco and measured its Syria with their missions okay well about same time you submitted papers etc is not sure be turning around and measuring the antibody okay all right so he’s banging at all right let us compare this two

fingers this is the lack of paper figures paper figures okay thank you I heard what people do this again your club then you go both the hum of course it’s met in about the same time the reviewers don’t know about the other people this is paper is meant to me and the reviewers said Canadian commands over whenever you’re said this is a legal public he gave the journal do a search and German fighter and what the author claimed was that he submitted to the others own it got reviewed the after revision he revised it centered in he said I didn’t do anything so I just assume one wasn’t published so she said Vincent olanta and let’s he be cut and and usually when something I just happens that the professor was here my students say they did more he admitted that he did senator the other paper he just did not do due diligence and so I’m talking tough chocolate relations so at least we give this publishing don’t sell plays rice the viewer guess says that the authors here often change journals to increase the number of the payments different paragraphs are not original and this is something that for very often people won’t cycles of the papers and I have big sections that are identical from the party don’t send the same work two different terms imagine two main weakness here’s the email about me Paul had an editor’s around the compacted as many a note from a dog today and he sent a paper to reviewer and the viewer says I reviewed the same paper for talanta so editors talk to one another so we didn’t publish that one oh I guess we do I guess come on they published it in a CA didn’t there’s another one this is comment by Paul had to the author I’ve received one review of this paper and he and why waiting for second review i notice another paper by the authors publishing talanta so we don’t even function plaintiff incident into a CA this is a little bit of his interesting history back in 1995 i received the paper submitted at i received a paper to review proceedings and at the same time i got essentially the same paper submitted to tell after all he was the reviewer and the energy and so the other he was unfortunate that i mislike interviewer and the only difference was he added acid field acetone in the Presidium favorite all the figures and results were identical otherwise and so I vote to Phrygia and I said I’ve got this paper into lambda and if identical so forth so for TV of course rights going to send my men obviously so sometimes courses coincidences happen and the counters locale again editor’s he talked to one another’s that this is a paper that was submitted to turn Omega culture food chemistry and they said to reviewer the reviewers if I were reviewing this for talented and and we still had in process I hadn’t accepted it I said yes we have this paper under review and the reviewers discovered that a part of her plagiarizing pen drop it I sent that to the editors so very often we luck out sometimes you might have with you think you don’t plagiarize this is a paper i got i sent up to review it says the reviewer says a lot of parts of it have been taking about the papers and even worse it appears that the entire of techs are simply lifted from the published work and he gives examples this says all go to large was changed to at the unit was too large down here said remote unit exchange to movie so forth

and the paper by Garrett who was read or was Garrett all right here’s a good example plagiarism this is the paper that charming woman my character received he’s handled out of the Middle East who got who they were on board he got this paper from Egypt and he said preview interviewer said okay published and it’s a electrode i selected lecture to determine chromium 3 and outside light medium my god published in a couple weeks after was published Verlander epithelial from Brazil big guy I know likes to may use of Gary I’d like you to compare this with this paper I published six years before and I murders on iron same exact title before irony I’m sorry Peter alright so we compare the two papers here’s the introduction in atlanta paper and analytical letters that identical except these changes were iron the text the figure now here’s where the reviewers let me down yet because he used the same figures but he forgot to change he puts the change on to chromium in the captions got to change the irons of chromium in the figure and here’s another example here’s the captions change coming but the figure itself is still iron although and once again the iron the chromium good one sloppy do and of course a overall so at first when chipcount shall contact you tonight with you so we’re attract these papers but problems are still in the literature and although the refractive papers are not removed and they type the literature it does say a retraction home so forth but it sounds or somewhere and they still get cited and of course editors from black hole some authors this is this is a letter of material both when you so like these better count letters rights to an offer that you plagiarize of paper and Blackwater students in this to other characters we do sometimes ranked at each other or serve others now I’m going to talk about the biggest fraud case in chemistry if you have pressed teacher gee I got many papers misc and sometimes they were from pay diem sometimes the opportunity to be one but two to three other the same guy and he always and they’re all same type of papers she have new reagent returning selenium be synthesized new reagents applied into giver and so he funny since Talcott he submitted paper to an antenna kacta for determining arsenic and san agustin to god he’s world expert on our street he sent to a cup of his students who works for toffee they both described it was plagiarized from japanese paper for determine chromium and he was using dynamic arbors on car beside at the reagent which is chromium 6 region won’t even react with arsenic and so this upsets and you very much of course send himself made you and so he writes course a very nasty no difficulty RGB and copies as department chair and who kind of knew something going on sweetener so this open up an investigation and so so all he didn’t change the word program to arsenic in that baby hey i got copied on that from sanjay gupta thank goodness i don’t have to look at this guy anybody i personally and at the very same day i got this email from sandy i got an email from another indian author an organic chemist who said distal getting synthesis nonsense and turns out he’s making up a listen give them more details here so this this is a paper that i had rejected that that the fellow civic organic chemistry wrong and so he turns around and cement with a couple

weeks later to another journal internal Heather’s of materials and then had three more offers I’m about there and the abstract texts were identical to the one you submitted to Atlanta actually we had kogi said tonight I guess and tables pictures identical police latching number of tables so for example here’s the table from Jay hazardous material paper here’s one from Planet paper we have 25.7 30.7 50.5 60.5 see obviously making up these numbers and this is it won many other tablets with this guy may have papers iris in 2006 i received nine papers from one of her muffin half or so and they’re all similar times paintings and I get a reviewer reviewers it is not very helpful and I’d start rejecting than without renew but finally he kept sending these papers of this country trying hard everybody feel kind of family Bible and a couple of paper the Reavers reviewers said there’s nothing really exciting about this but nothing mom would that you can probably polish so I publish it on paper the egg mistake then I got a paper every three weeks right and this is what he did once an editor accepted paper ii love that terms of flavors and so for example he had 66 papers submitted 1accepted 2005 hemisphere that five rejected that review in two thousand six at 10 favorite published and environmental monitoring assessment this is a very short period of time at tiny gap cot he had internal hazard materials he had fine published yet aight impressed at the same time he was just letting me editors with these majors and quite amazing and here’s a rejected play I paper I a reject referred him cloud point extraction of a playin a submitted at three weeks later to journal heavy material this is one had three additional option I got accepted so the bottom line is in three years chiranjeevi published 70 papers and 25 different terminals some of me Roberto but he got dis looked everywhere he would be published yet I get a spreadsheet on 50 15 of his papers on a track down and he had 27 different co-authors in those 15 papers his university does not allow a professor at more than six students he had 56 co-authors all these papers the equipment he supposed to was supposed to be using the non-existent so i get i gave this talk at the university of maryland on the way to Europe to European European merit of my alma mater and there was a that’s near Washington DC where chemical chemical engineering news is very on the site and there was a lady in the audience whose husband is a reporter for chemical engineering news so I get back home and I get an email from him from her husband wanting more information of this so I sent him about 120 email documenting what this guy’s done I give a lot of time is about put one so he writes his big long article temple engineering news about what is going dead I said case of fraud and you coach some of the things published through a wide variety of email addresses Sharon G being claimed to be using advanced implementation not available to the University the chemistry in most of these papers is illogical worst is usually he’s charging students money get paid Rosen pondicherry in somebody’s making those to me says yeah wondering how the obese news getting out to year and of course the students learn this from him some of them are being the same thing I said I said I hated to see papers coming this guy obviously and so share GD sakky was a flood journals with manuscript relations in the hopes but wearing down after two would eventually published something’s work man so what what he was doing well then then as soon as the scene you use article got online I get a call an email

from a reporter from science magnet and they only talk about the big stuff and so they set him all the same item 20 emails and sweetheart stars that are above this time is chemistry teachers after all the series of high-profile side to be missed conduct stem cell biology and physics an Indian professor is the punishment and then I got also published for an interview with science chair Jerry said the charges against him are baseless and not correct he blames colleagues and journal editors for creating this Medusa’s says that he plans to take action in international court of justice the problem postoperative falsified pic won’t we know because they’re still out there soaking around and then RC chemistry great britain got into it and i’m going on our water and they had a reporter in india ranked in top x more make another one that found out of this other some of these authors maybe they they finally did an investigation on him they’ve heard about a 250 pages report but they didn’t make it published but they did a one-page summary if punishment was it could not take students he could not have grass and he could not have an administrative position I think he had no grants anyway yeah no students anyway and and he had happened he was the vice chair yes definite he’s like seven years from retirement they letting coast i think in part me should be jelly and i think that so he was started the day by asking students what have you done was in detecting pull the probe page to download a copy and so he got started he visited another character professors will have any got preprint of a pedro huge and that’s weeks got the template and this professor found out about it and what he’s doing he was claiming to synthesize these new reagents we get a new reason for selenium and I said tell whatever story dude and as Union County Commission okay which false okay so they returned sleiman watery genus then he determined get another paper to Jerusalem in blood and then he change of functional group on it and go through the same iteration and so forth then they changed swinging your go throw them generate me just grinding out all these papers all identical of course not cross referencing anything you see them all at the same time the viewers couldn’t know about quite amazing so may watch your ingenious to waste apoco RC magazine says the case against him was fabricated an inquiry committee with one sided on april i will be ready to fight in court he told chemistry world there’s nothing bored he actually making the students having that’s good for millions of dollars and after this investigation was completed the governing vice director who reopened it because you were to know why all these department chairs geography geology physics mathematics for environmental company about 45 department chairs or co-author so I don’t know what can be called that but he didn’t he didn’t hold a grudge he I’ve got this email one day saying from page there Jimmy like that you see as a predator on my iPod so that’s the biggest case of fraud go and try to fool the editors this is an invasive paper manuscripts and I got a paper from China and I think it should run without Michelle but anyway in those days when you got something came across the ocean city so forth so this is a paper those handwritten very long very detailed to this kind of long con right into paper and he says and the references work too so anyway I haven’t get that favor just for had a trip to Belgium I stopped to visit jean-michel copy he had the same exact handwritten paper on Justin he sent him both of us so again questianus I had the shift at the right side otherwise who well this is another I got a lot of

papers from again the same thing will remember novelette have them method of some sort and I send off to review in the rulership not novel and so forth so this is a paper i interject a couple three weeks later he turned around and resubmitted come chill company it’s a paid with media i handle paper continue luckily John Michell be expected to me and I already rejected it so i right and this manuscript with recently rejected this is to the author I preview an event remember you Vincent to edit Rahman I guess hoping that you ever again that’s so forth your boy now before the electro etc novelty we will not receive his manuscript and but this is the review i had on and the reviewers that i’ve seen so many papers from this guy very similar and he somehow be some publish if you turn it down yo submit somewhere else and editors to jump out and so actually i set this to editors mount imaging hello so forth and other than pain so again everywhere to talk to her and I’ve never done this before only time we’re done I wrote to this softer i said i had many papers from you and I and I feel an obligation when I don’t have a paper reviewed most of it I would have to justify blood scientifically why I’m not going to have this review my gimme that took a lot of my Connie watch it on yet and I go back and find prior correspondent leaving this on a similar paper can you read this and so forth I had it took a lot of my tongue so finally I Brodin answering said I tried to be fur with you on these papers but I’ve concluded it to land is not the proper place and so I actually he did send review paperwork Commission did you get my email yet what’s energy and I had do as authors to suggest reviewers and sometimes though suggest American Home Department it was known country i attended a grain of salt i may may not use it as a check reviewer but I usually try to find one anyway but this is a paper i had from india and had multiple offered water and I and what a suggestion from Japan ok so that’s happened out of indy onsen there he writes back thank you but I see I’m an opera some other place has been rejected paper sometime later both the interpretive remember and this is telling the agent that sent the same paper over and over to different editors he finally got one accepted after three revisions the same paper some with the jaw Michelle and we got was a repair on board him and you could reject it of course it used and if you be submitted to another journal that you can of course do pay attention to the reviewers of the first paper because it would improve the name and very often as you see the reviewers will be the city and they’ll say I’m cheating’s before hasn’t changed so do pay attention reboot their reviews the peer review system is tip for your advantage as well as for the attackers and maybe you sent to the wrong turn another journal be appropriate taking management to critique gun expert already this is a review here area I have seen this paper before not much has changed I cannot follow about you consider so another’s you’re only using same to you dear dr Maria submit the following paper to collapse dr. Murray with the editor man for chemistry Rosemarie so I know he’s reciting it raises a red flag your professor Christian I submit this paper to allocate coming connected red flag to maybe even change the cover these in real time here’s another this is an email thing for fall at it again yes I receive attached review manuscript for a see a reviewer comments about seeing some pretty simmer for classes so again

to me I said dear Paul yes we have seen that paper and rejected it so author is reciting it attach it to review that we see yes editor succulent of it especially so students don’t sighs write the introduction to chill because sometimes when you writing your thesis you have an introduction you cite literature and so forth and you may copy that word for word when you start writing the paper you may be place right so self load ratings and remember as you may not catch this as I say you submit to the right journal reader a bespoke so we often get paper safe as you ain’t nothing you come from chemistry maybe physical chemistry paper or something or maybe something using straw for remediation of pollutants and water or suck up to it from chemistry why they submit to get rid of course we learn international journal you’ve had with mobile world and so English as a Second Life people and so their English may not be very good so this reviewer’s of the main problem with the pavement english well so we understand we understand that but try to get expert help don’t afraid to get somebody else to check on your English in fact a professional English Pettigrew’s no days and even in the English is excellent doesn’t for that somebody absolutely people and critique it and it will help the reviewers understandings that will work with you shape you can of course your butt with your comments sometimes we miss something or just alert and yours may have different opinions but I fear my to me as the editor to make the decision decide which one is correct very often if I ever negative review in detail I’ll brightly lighted not there are number pleasures and detection tools that we use and all our papers now automatically give a synthetic aid or they call it cross cross reference I think and this is a beautiful color codes all the texts and papers against so you can tell normally you might have fifteen or twenty three men duplication our neighbor from because they’re you do the same experimental old so forth and some of the offer that’s that’s okay but when it gets up to thirty forty fifty percent then that random raises a red flag and start looking that with duplication very carefully and also it’s a good source getting reviewer find something that that comes up and having references and there are a number of other things you can use viewers can use look for several papers medline scopus google scholar sciFinder scholar so forth so it’s harder for offers these days to get away with duplication in place for him to focus on them so truck I got one the other day were sixty percent paper was copied another one of the authors he didn’t reference the paper just gives him success existed before I got in mckelvey on board to help me when I was getting close to five hundred papers to 278 that a year and about a third I rejected without you so I with review based on my Chandra save your viewer time and another third is rejected F review so about a third were accepted overall and that price so students be brave right that first paper and you only learn by doing and whatever what are the most valuable things I learned is that the gratitude of Micra predator let me lose a hand write my own papers and I learn how to do it and my skill I’ve had some students tell me that the most valuable thing they learned from you was Mother’s Finest was hot right because no matter what job you have you have to communicate and writing and oral communication is very important might be here so that’s all most important more important than science degree so expect criticism from both your professor and some reviewers it’s an absolutely normal so don’t be insulted if you have which could take critical reviews and say almost all the pay those papers I do accept virtually all of them do need some revision I probably can count on one hand how many papers I’ve accepted

without any change of the news and usually those are papers that I guarantee i can’t help get your review I get paper reverse that’s is fine published and I try to get out of it and give up so it’s very rare so thank you and happy right well it’s a whole new year I’ve heard about today I’ve got your world this is real so I hope that you got the message that corruption is of not only dealing with directly with money and you better invest in doing in writing honest and good work and when i get the review to my papers sometimes I where there is some criticism I don’t think so easily a likely bed like most of the people are gone through this but after a while after the couple days think about it and some of them are good and no doubt the paper is highly improved and comes up much better afterwards so I agree with recipes inside that pay attention to what reviewers site and this was message right right right don’t wait for another people to write it for you can just add on your name anyway I would like to ask is for anybody has any comment at you okay thank you very much for you message and about your publish or perish let me at the other side of the coin help your friends to publish your enemies in page and this recalled me that some years ago professor gabon manageable from budapest university was the chairman of the european computational cancel vision and we wrote an internal node calling attention what he called the tyranny for the tyranny of cycling saying that there are considered number scientists that do not cite other scientists from papers they occur salt-based of their work because either they are competitors or they are enemies and you your fault in your lecture too many authors to the same paper I used to call that the permutations of em and because there are a lot of awesome sometimes I ask if they all know what is written in the paper and afterwards they are another paper with the same office but the first is not one before their protection of there is another aspect and I I went to my knowledge and that is the deform the American the American physicist just open which is also who were so also on history of science reported an article published in physical QD in 1992 with 365 offers from santee three institutions spread all over the world I hope like do you propose it on these aspects present just Nick reposition particularly tend to do this

to be working huge groups of the international so yeah that’s where your heart button but I do get a number of papers where they’ll be aight author to 10 why and you know that they’re patting each other on the back and I have had papers that been accepted published and I’ll get a letter from one of the authors say I would not wear this I don’t want my name on this paper they allow something and so please do I have to do this that happens when when the Chinese first started publishing 10-15 years ago not just in science every every area publication they’re flooding fraternity and some examples I gave where they are submitting the same paper girls but from China at that time because they were getting basically a year’s salary they can get published in with maternal and also going rosemary told me that if they get cited in a western thermal they would get free money so i used to get favor from china and all the child of the Russians would be Chinese papers then they started getting cited in reference complished much internals so all the references that would be from questions so play games my kids and your example of where enemies were involved and so forth that is more political guilt that is more political than scientific they should show course I could work anybody that’s yes knowledgeable in the field it’s hard to ignore but yeah but in any case sorry america is the fraud in the relatively the percentage of the problem these sizes they compared with the from politics or any sale of a small self patient remember comment don’t move yet i get i need a picture if you can get a feature and stuff Wow okay ask you will seat here and i will take a picture of you I think when if you also know if it’s a Nazi it’s sunny outside we could if we take it outside maybe we can I I often refer to an episode it happened in 1993 we had the impact journalist he’ll be here in our faculty and it was in August difficulty it was something organized so much time invest and we had some difficulty in finding people to help because we get fifty three rooms working simultaneously so we had the help of our own children the children of our colleagues rose between 15 and 20 resume so they became friends that began brings afterwards we still had some of the people working here in the faculty set of the secretaries and Sammy and colleagues and they were

saying when they were looking at people and it had all this is so Excel so they knew the names they had written they had read the names so they were happy that they could come in finally a person coming to their a school because usually you think that they are in sanpao right okay thank you very much again prima game is a nation