The analysis, which included nearly 5 million articles published in nearly 5,500 publications between 2015 and 2019, found that most journals publish work by a large number of authors.
But a small number of journals featured “hyper-prolific” individuals that were published disproportionately more often — and that their papers were more likely to be accepted for publication within three weeks of submission.
“Our results underscore possible problematic relationships between authors who sit on editorial boards and decision-making editors,” the researchers wrote, though they cautioned that publishers typically promote independence between researchers and journals.Sommer Brokaw, “Study shows possible bias, ‘nepotistic behavior’ in some science journals” at UPI [United Press International] (November 23, 2021)
Lost somewhere in the snow: “Some of these authors, the researchers said, are also on the editorial boards of the journals.”
The rest of the news release goes on to minimize the problem and soften the blow — not the usual approach in media (for good reason).
Oh, never mind. With that kind of help, the problems will just go on.
The paper is open access.