Skip to content

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
What was that say
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

Publisher blacklists authors after preprint cites made-up studies – Retraction Watch (Ivan Oransky | April 2023)

Posted by Dr Gary Allen in Research Integrity on August 2, 2023
Keywords: Journal, Publication ethics, Research results, Researcher responsibilities
Tired depressed bored african researcher I'm not gonna be frustrated by research failure computer looking at laptop feel exhausted having headache, upset stressed black office worker worried about problem at work

Last month, a millipede expert in Denmark received an email notifying him that one of his publications had been mentioned in a new manuscript on Preprints.org. But when the researcher, Henrik Enghoff, downloaded the paper, he learned that it cited his work for something off-topic.

Retraction Watch’s story highlights why researchers shouldn’t treat systems like ChatGPT as research assistants that can be safely delegated tasks.  In this case, the artificial intelligence system made up references that superficially seemed credible but were, in fact entirely fictitious. The results appeared to match the search criteria the system was provided, but the results were a digital hallucination.  The consequences, as they were in this case, can be incredibly serious and devastate a career.  They should serve as a warning for researchers considering using ChatGPT in their work.

Stranger still, the authors of the now-withdrawn preprint, a group of researchers in China and Africa, also referenced two papers by Enghoff that he knew he hadn’t written. It turned out they didn’t exist.

“I’ve never had anything like this happen before,” Enghoff, a professor at the Natural History Museum of Denmark, in Copenhagen, told Retraction Watch.

Flabbergasted, Enghoff reached out to David Richard Nash at the University of Copenhagen. A few months prior, Nash had been experimenting with OpenAI’s ChatGPT, an artificial-intelligence chatbot, to see if it could be used to find scientific literature. He asked the bot to provide him with recent references on the butterfly species he works with. “It came back with 10 plausible-looking papers,” only one of which existed, Nash told Retraction Watch.

After learning of Enghoff’s case, Nash emailed Preprints.org, a free preprint server owned by the scientific publisher MDPI. He explained that he had looked up five random references in the preprint and found that all of them were fictitious. He also hinted that generative artificial intelligence such as ChatGPT could have been at work, adding:

I suggest that you contact the authors directly and ask for an explanation (and hopefully a retraction and apology to the affected “authors” of these fake references), and also review your policies regarding accepting AI-generated textxs [sic] and references.

Publisher blacklists authors after preprint cites made-up studies
Henrik Enghoff Last month, a millipede expert in Denmark received an email notifying him that one of his publications had been mentioned in a new manuscript on Preprints.org. But when the researche…

Related Reading

Researchers embracing ChatGPT are like turkeys voting for Christmas – Times Higher Education (Dirk Lindebaum | May 2023)

What Chatbot Bloopers Reveal About the Future of AI – WIRED (Will Knight | February 2023)

Scientists Allege Researcher Faked Reproductive Health Data Across Dozens of Papers – Jezebel (Caitlin Cruz | August 2022)

Retractions are increasing, but not enough – Nature (Ivan Oransky | August 2022)

Stamp out fake clinical data by working together – Nature (Lisa Bero | January 2021)

(Australia) Michael Briggs 1935-1986. Faked data on the safety of oral contraceptive preparations taken by millions of women – Dr Geoff (December 2017)

As China cracks down on faked drug trial data, US FDA abandons disclosure rule – Retraction Watch (Adam Marcus | October 2018)

Bruce Murdoch: Former University of Queensland professor given suspended sentence for fraud – Courier Mail (Melanie Petrinec 2016)

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Links

Complaints against Research Ethics Monthly

Request a Takedown

Submission Guidelines

About the Research Ethics Monthly

About subscribing to the Research Ethics Monthly

A diverse group discussing a topic

Random selected image from the AHRECS library. These were all purchased from iStockPhoto. These are images we use in our workshops and Dr Allen used in the GUREM.

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in