, P. O. Box 7, Miki-cho Post Office, Ikenobe 3011-2, Miki-cho, Kagawa-ken, 761-0799, Japan.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2017 Dec;23(6):1807-1810. doi: 10.1007/s11948-016-9825-7. Epub 2016 Nov 9.
The blogosphere is full of personalities with masks, or pseudonyms. Although not a desired state of public communication, one could excuse the use of pseudonyms in blogs and social media, which are generally unregulated or weakly regulated. However, in science publishing, there are increasingly strict rules regarding the use of false identities for authors, the lack of institutional or contact details, and the lack of conflicts of interest, and such instances are generally considered to be misconduct. This is because these violations of publishing protocol decrease trust and confidence in science and bring disrepute to those scientists who conform to the rules set out by journals and publishers and abide by them. Thus, when cases are encountered where trust and protocol in publishing are breached, these deserve to be highlighted. In this letter, I focus on Neuroskeptic, a highly prominent science critic, primarily on the blogosphere and in social media, highlighting the dangers associated with the use of pseudonyms in academic publishing.
博客世界充满了戴着面具或使用笔名的人。虽然这不是公众交流的理想状态，但人们可以原谅博客和社交媒体上使用笔名的行为，因为这些平台通常不受监管或监管力度较弱。然而，在科学出版领域，对于作者使用虚假身份、缺乏机构或联系方式以及利益冲突等问题，有越来越严格的规定，这种情况通常被视为不当行为。这是因为这些违反出版规范的行为降低了人们对科学的信任和信心，并使那些遵守期刊和出版商规定的科学家名誉受损。因此，当出版过程中的信任和规范受到侵犯时，这些行为应该被曝光。在这封信中，我主要关注的是神经怀疑论者（Neuroskeptic），一位非常知名的科学评论家，他主要活跃在博客和社交媒体上，强调了在学术出版中使用笔名所带来的危险。
