A Paper Mill Target Reflects

Over the coming months, Open Knowledge will present perspectives from those on publishing integrity’s front lines. Paper mills continue to pollute the scholarly record and are doing so at a time when trust in science already shows signs of fray. Understanding what is being done to address the crisis—what is working and where we as a community are falling short—couldn’t be more important. In this Q and A, Miriam Maus explains the impact of paper mills at IOPP and shares her thoughts on the broader impact fake research is having on science.

Please describe your organization.

IOP Publishing is a society-owned scientific publisher, delivering impact, recognition, and value to the scientific community. Our purpose is to expand the world of physics, offering a portfolio of journals, ebooks, conference proceedings, and science news resources globally. We are founding members of Purpose-Led Publishing, a coalition of society publishers who pledge to always put purpose above profit. In practice, this means that all funds generated from publishing research go directly to the Institute of Physics to make physics accessible to people from all backgrounds.

Describe your role and how you are involved with research integrity.

As the chief publishing officer, I’m responsible for the creation and delivery of IOPP’s publishing and researcher engagement strategy and am a member of IOPP’s board of directors.

Working with a global team of publishing and marketing professionals, I ensure that IOPP’s publishing activities deliver trusted content of high quality, that the organization takes a leadership role in publishing ethics and integrity and inclusive and transparent publishing practices, and that the power of technology is harnessed to improve the publishing experience for all involved.

How important is research integrity to IOPP?

As a purpose-led publisher, IOP Publishing deeply values research integrity. We are committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in all aspects of the publication process and will always put our purpose before profit. We donate APC revenue from retracted papers to Research4Life and we invest heavily in new resources and technology to manage the scholarly record against fraud and misconduct.

How has IOPP been impacted by paper mills?

Between 2018 and 2021, IOP Publishing’s Conference Series were targeted by paper mills—organizations that produce and submit fraudulent research for publication. Conference proceedings and special issues are particularly vulnerable to this type of misconduct due to the distance between the publisher and the peer-review process, which is often exploited in cases involving paper mills.

What has been IOPP’s response?

We recognize that it is our responsibility to develop robust, scalable, and sustainable systems that can effectively detect misconduct and prevent it from infiltrating the publishing process. A couple of years ago we implemented a range of new systems and checks to detect problematic papers before they reach publication, and that work is continuously evolving. Early results of these measures are encouraging, though no system is completely foolproof. When falsified papers do slip through, we take immediate action and work closely with institutions to correct the scholarly record, as well as use it as a learning opportunity to update our teams and systems on emerging methods of fraud. We are committed to being open and transparent about retractions and expressions of concern, ensuring that any issues are promptly addressed.

Our ongoing effort is essential in maintaining the trust of the research community and upholding the highest standards of research integrity.

How has IOPP positioned itself to address the changing strategies of paper mills?

To stay ahead of paper mills, we collaborate with industry experts, including research sleuths, fellow publishers, and the STM Integrity Hub, and, as members of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), we leverage their guidance and best practices to strengthen our processes. This network allows us to stay informed about emerging trends in fraudulent research and respond quickly with effective countermeasures. Through these partnerships, we are able to continually refine our systems, ensuring that our publications maintain the highest standards of integrity.

In 2022, we took decisive action by retracting a large number of paper mill proceedings papers, sending a clear message that fraudulent papers will not be tolerated in our publications. This proactive approach reinforces our commitment to maintaining the integrity of our content and ensures that our defenses evolve alongside new threats.

What do you believe have been the consequences and impact of the paper mill crisis more broadly?

High level of retractions due to the widespread issue of paper mills has significantly eroded public trust in science and cast doubt on the integrity of research outputs. This crisis undermines the efforts of diligent scientists, forcing them to work even harder to demonstrate the legitimacy and value of their findings. The societal implications are profound, as diminished trust in scientific research can lead to skepticism about critical issues such as public health, climate change, and technology.

It has really made us rethink our responsibilities within the academic ecosystem. It underscores the need for us to communicate more effectively about the value we as publishers add in ensuring research quality and integrity through rigorous peer review. Transparency and accountability are absolute key in restoring confidence in the research community.

How well do you believe the community has responded to paper mills and what more do you believe should be done?

The academic community’s response to paper mills is growing, but there are still significant gaps. Publishers have taken steps in coming together to share intelligence, data, and resources to detect and combat paper mills. The STM Integrity Hub is blazing a trail in creating a stronger, more unified front to safeguard the quality of the academic record.

However, the broader academic ecosystem—especially funders, institutions, and preprint servers—has been slower to engage at the same level. While publishers aim to prevent fraudulent papers entering the system and correct the scientific record when needed, we cannot operate in a vacuum. There’s a pressing need for institutions and funders to recognize what constitutes good and bad research and take a more active role in stamping out research malpractices and considering how incentive structures are influencing behavior.

A promising initiative is “United2Act,” an initiative supported by COPE and STM that brings together international stakeholders to address the collective challenge of paper mills in scholarly publishing. The idea behind United2Act is to create dialogue and cooperation across the academic ecosystem, ensuring that research integrity is upheld at every stage. By working together, stakeholders in the academic research lifecycle can pool together resources, share intelligence, and implement common strategies to identify and prevent content generated by paper mills finding its way through to the scholarly record.

Collaborative efforts should extend to every part of the academic pipeline. Encouraging consistent engagement across all stakeholders and tightening accountability measures could significantly curb the influence of paper mills and safeguard the integrity of academic publishing.

What impact do you believe AI will have on publishing fraud and paper mills on the one side and the ability of publishing on the other side in maintaining integrity?

AI is already reshaping the landscape of academic publishing, impacting both paper mills and the ability of publishers to uphold high standards of research integrity.

On one hand, AI is assisting paper mills by enabling the rapid generation of content, making it easier to produce large volumes of low-quality or fake papers. On the other hand, AI could also put paper mills out of business. Tools like ChatGPT can quickly generate papers for free, making it unnecessary for paper mills to charge for their services.

On the publisher’s side, AI can serve as a powerful ally in maintaining integrity. AI tools can help support the human peer-review process, reducing bottlenecks by assisting with repetitive tasks like checking for methodological soundness, verifying citations, and ensuring reviews cover all the aspects of the literature. AI can spot patterns of fraud or plagiarism, or anomalies in data and results, which human reviewers might miss. There are still concerns, however, about its reliability and potential to introduce bias; as such we don’t believe it should replace human review, but it may be able to support it.

However, AI’s sophistication is a double-edged sword. As AI-generated content becomes more advanced, distinguishing between legitimate research and fraudulent work will become increasingly difficult. This creates the risk of “phantom” papers, where AI-generated content appears real but lacks substantive scientific value.

The erosion of trust caused by AI and paper mills will require concerted efforts to rebuild. We will need to enhance transparency, reproducibility, and perhaps stronger evidence-based checks alongside every published paper.

But overall, human oversight will remain essential. AI can augment the peer review process but not fully replace the judgment required to assess the nuances of scientific work. To restore and maintain trust in the publishing process, publishers, institutions, and researchers must develop systems to validate provenance and ensure the credibility of the work, especially as AI becomes more integrated into both fraudulent and legitimate practices.