{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,29]],"date-time":"2026-04-29T03:08:26Z","timestamp":1777432106413,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":8,"publisher":"Emerald","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2018,4,9]],"date-time":"2018-04-09T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1523232000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/site-policies"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["OIR"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,4,9]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec>\n<jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Purpose<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>The purpose of this paper is to assess the relative opacity of the \u201cAbout\u201d page at PubPeer, which is a whistleblower website, primarily of the academic literature. The site refers to itself as an online journal club. It is important to assess whether the PubPeer site, organization or leadership display opacity because PubPeer attempts to hold the authors who have published errors in their literature to the high standards of transparency.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Design\/methodology\/approach<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>The paper examined the statements of the \u201cAbout\u201d page at PubPeer to assess the aspects of opacity. The \u201cAbout\u201d page is the face and image of an organization to the public.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Findings<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>In 2015, The PubPeer Foundation was created as a charitable organization to receive funding in the USA, and at the end of 2016, the PubPeer Foundation received funding (US$ 412,000) from a philanthropic organization, the Laura and John Arnold Foundation. Several of these details were not indicated in the older version of the \u201cAbout\u201d page at PubPeer. Other aspects of that page are opaque.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Research limitations\/implications<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>To fully assess the opacity of PubPeer, continual monitoring is needed. The examination of the \u201cAbout\u201d page gives a limited perspective.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Practical implications<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>Academics are under intense scrutiny by a vigilant anonymous and pseudonymous community at PubPeer. Any opacity by PubPeer, as was documented here, reduces trust in its objectives and operations. Reduced trust is at the heart of the replication crisis.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>\n<jats:sec>\n<jats:title content-type=\"abstract-subheading\">Originality\/value<\/jats:title>\n<jats:p>This paper represents the first published critical assessment of PubPeer. Science watchdogs, which watch various science-related organizations, also need to be watched.<\/jats:p>\n<\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1108\/oir-06-2017-0191","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2018,2,1]],"date-time":"2018-02-01T07:14:08Z","timestamp":1517469248000},"page":"282-287","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["The opacity of the PubPeer Foundation: what PubPeer\u2019s \u201cAbout\u201d page tells us"],"prefix":"10.1108","volume":"42","author":[{"given":"Jaime A.","family":"Teixeira da Silva","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"140","reference":[{"issue":"2","key":"key2020092913014697800_ref001","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"907","DOI":"10.1104\/pp.15.01443","article-title":"Vigilante science","volume":"169","year":"2015","journal-title":"Plant Physiology"},{"key":"key2020092913014697800_ref002","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1126\/science.aad1691","article-title":"PubPeer\u2019s secret is out: founder of controversial website reveals himself","year":"2015","journal-title":"Science"},{"issue":"6252","key":"key2020092913014697800_ref003","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1036","DOI":"10.1126\/science.349.6252.1036","article-title":"PubPeer co-founder reveals identity \u2013 and new plans","volume":"349","year":"2015","journal-title":"Science"},{"issue":"3","key":"key2020092913014697800_ref004","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"13","DOI":"10.5901\/jesr.2015.v5n3p13","article-title":"Fair use in post-publication peer review","volume":"5","year":"2015","journal-title":"Journal of Educational and Social Research"},{"issue":"3","key":"key2020092913014697800_ref005","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"13","DOI":"10.5901\/ajis.2016.v5n3p13","article-title":"Science watchdogs","volume":"5","year":"2016","journal-title":"Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies"},{"issue":"6","key":"key2020092913014697800_ref007","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1807","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-016-9825-7","article-title":"Are pseudonyms ethical in (science) publishing? Neuroskeptic as a case study","volume":"23","year":"2017","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"issue":"1","key":"key2020092913014697800_ref008","first-page":"5","article-title":"Why does PubPeer not acknowledge Retraction Watch as a media source?","volume":"4","year":"2017","journal-title":"Journal of Advocacy, Research and Education"},{"issue":"1","key":"key2020092913014697800_ref006","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"323","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-016-9863-1","article-title":"Reflection on the Fazlul Sarkar vs PubPeer (\u2018John Doe\u2019) case","volume":"24","year":"2018","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"}],"container-title":["Online Information Review"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/OIR-06-2017-0191\/full\/xml","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.emerald.com\/insight\/content\/doi\/10.1108\/OIR-06-2017-0191\/full\/html","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,24]],"date-time":"2025-07-24T22:43:15Z","timestamp":1753396995000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.emerald.com\/oir\/article\/42\/2\/282-287\/314314"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2018,4,9]]},"references-count":8,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,4,9]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1108\/OIR-06-2017-0191"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1108\/oir-06-2017-0191","relation":{},"ISSN":["1468-4527"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1468-4527","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2018,4,9]]}}}