Scientists are generally pleased to learn that their papers are being discussed and cited. Discussion on one platform, however, is a cause of consternation: PubPeer. No scientist wants to learn that their paper is being examined on PubPeer. Created in 2012, PubPeer has become synonymous for whistleblowing about alleged scientific research misconduct. Though the site was not initially intended to serve as a vehicle for raising concerns about research, when the site began allowing anonymous comments to be posted, it transformed into a community used to voice suspicion about the integrity of research papers.
How Does PubPeer Work
PubPeer provides a means for post-publication peer review. Visitors to the site can search for an author’s name, keywords, or the title of a paper. The site also encourages visitors to download the PubPeer plugin, which notifies readers of a paper if the paper has discussion history on PubPeer. When an author’s paper is discussed on PubPeer, the site also notifies the author and invites a response from the author.
While the site, in theory, allows for dialogue among scientists, in reality, the extent of discussion and rate of responses from authors are relatively minimal. A recent paper studying comments on PubPeer reported the following statistics:
- Only 31.5% of publications receive more than three comments,
- Only 7.5% of authors respond, and
- 6% of comments are anonymous
See Ortega, J. L. (2022). Classification and analysis of PubPeer comments: How a web journal club is used. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 73(5), 655–670.
What do Academic Institutions Do When They Receive Information from PubPeer
With PubPeer’s growing popularity in the scientific community, colleges and universities, as well as the federal Office of Research Integrity, regularly receive anonymous reports of suspected fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism. Because the federal government requires schools to investigate federally funded research, schools have policies for conducting scientific research misconduct investigations. Scientists will generally go through a two-step process consisting of the inquiry phase and the investigative phase.
What Should a Scientist Do If Their Research is Criticized on PubPeer
Any scientist whose research is discussed on PubPeer should immediately contact legal counsel experienced with navigating scientific research misconduct proceedings. In our years of experience handling these cases, a growing number of investigations by academic institutions and/or ORI stem from comments made anonymously on PubPeer. We have successfully represented scientists, professors, and graduate students across the country (and abroad) who have faced loss of their professional reputations and research funding.
