1 The retractions came only weeks after BioMed Central.

Most other digital manuscript submission systems have similar loopholes that may easily be hacked. The most important lesson is that incentives work. This pressure exists almost but is specially intense in China everywhere. It is consequently no real surprise that the many inventive ways to game the peer-review program to get manuscripts released have come from China. The companies mentioned above offering fake peer evaluations all come from countries and China in Southeast Asia, and most of the authors involved in these cases come from the same areas. But it will be a mistake to look at this as a Chinese or Asian problem. The problem may be the perverse incentive systems in scientific publishing.But voters believe they should have been more concerned about individual rights. According to the survey, the results which had been released June 27, a plurality of Likely Voters – 43 % – feel just like federal government officials have worried an excessive amount of about national protection at the expense of those rights in the NSA surveillance program. By comparison, just 12 % believe authorities has worried an excessive amount of about protecting individual privileges, while significantly less than one-third – thirty % – believe the balance to be about right.