Geschatte leestijd: 3 minuten
They’ve been found; the cells that enable Jedi to use the Force. The ‘Midichlorians’ are described in a paper that has been published in several journals. ‘Peer-reviewed’ no less! Soon you’ll be squatting 200 kilos with your mind.
Midichlorians
You don’t have to be the biggest nerd to know that midi-chlorians normally only occur in high levels in those who have skills with ‘the Force’. That’s my excuse at least. For readers who didn’t catch that the writers of the piece are referring to Star Wars, a full quote from one of the films is included. You also don’t necessarily have to have a passion for biology to know that ‘midichlorians’ here should be replaced with ‘mitochondria’. You would think that a scientific ‘peer-reviewed’ journal would know better than to publish a paper that is clearly a mix of Star Wars and wiki-biology.
And yet it happened. A total of four online journals picked up the publication. That certainly inspires confidence in science.
“Midichlorians-mediated oxidative stress causes cardio-myopathy in Type 2 diabetics. As more fatty acids are delivered to the heart, and into cardiomyocytes, the oxidation of fatty acids in these cells increases. Did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth Plagueis the Wise? I thought not. It is not a story the Jedi would tell you.”
Online peer-reviewed journals
You’re a researcher and want to bring your research to the attention of your peers. Publish or perish is the motto after all. If your research is published in ten different journals, it must have been groundbreaking. Those journals are ‘peer-reviewed’; experts in your field have reviewed your work and deemed it suitable for publication. This is also handy for bloggers like me who don’t have the means, time, and often the knowledge to fully check a study for reliability and strength. However, if you also have to assess the journals and the peer-review process, then it becomes difficult.
As a scientific journal, you can ask researchers for compensation for the publication and review process. To ensure that researchers want to publish with you, you naturally want to show that others have gone before them. A rigorous review process is not necessarily the way to publish as much as possible, if that’s your goal. Especially in a time when people want free access to the latest insights and paid access to articles is threatened like any form of paid media.
The blogger known as
Neurosceptic recently painfully, but humorously, showed that these conflicting goals do not promote the quality and reliability of certain journals and thus science as a whole. Four out of the nine online open-access journals to which he submitted his ‘jedi paper’ accepted it without comment. Three of them did so for free. Some caught on to the joke and asked for the piece to be resubmitted, provided it referenced previous work by
Palpatine et al.
“Don’t underestimate the Fake news”
Although funny, it’s quite sad. The low cost of publishing a journal online and conflicting interests undermine the reliability of science through fake news.
The chances of an unsuspecting blogger taking findings from studies in these journals are high. From experts in the field, you would at least hope they know what the more reliable sources are. Although that can also become difficult when intentionally similar-sounding names are devised for less reputable journals. Nowadays, we all know that damage from fake news often cannot be undone, no matter how many retractions and corrections you throw at it.
The Jedi paper once again shows the need to check your sources carefully. And how easy it is to spread nonsense.
References
livescience.com/59927-midi-chlorians-paper-accepted-by-journals.html
