title: Referees often miss obvious errors in computer and electronic publications.
abstract: Misconduct is extensive and damaging. So-called science is prevalent. Articles resulting from so-called science are often cited in other publications. This can have damaging consequences for society and for science. The present work includes a scientometric study of 350 articles (published by the Association for Computing Machinery; Elsevier; The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.; John Wiley; Springer; Taylor & Francis; and World Scientific Publishing Co.). A lower bound of 85.4% articles are found to be incongruous. Authors cite inherently self-contradictory articles more than valid articles. Incorrect informational cascades ruin the literature's signal-to-noise ratio even for uncomplicated cases.
authors.affiliation: Department of Information Engineering, Pisa University, Pisa, Italy. Colin_Paul_Gloster@ACM.org
authors.forename: Paul Colin
authors.initials: PC
authors.lastname: de Gloucester
mesh_terms: D015706:Bibliometrics; D003201:Computers; D003205:Computing Methodologies; D004581:Electronics; D010506:Periodicals as Topic / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011643:Publishing / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D059629:Signal-To-Noise Ratio; D012984:Software