Unethical attitudes in scientific research: hegemony of the impact factor and associated behaviors

Introduction: Over the last 10 years, a series of inappropriate practices in scientific research related to the superiority of the impact factor have emerged, such as the growing number of predatory journals, citation manipulation, and the rapid growth of misleading metrics. These practices undermine the integrity of science, especially in contexts with emerging evaluation systems. Objective: To identify inappropriate practices in scientific research generated by the hegemony of the impact factor and the associated behaviors of journals and researchers. In this way, we hope to contribute to improving the quality and transparency of the scientific publishing ecosystem. Methodology: A mixed-method scoping review was used, analyzing scientific production (2009–2024), database reports (Scopus, WoS), and emblematic cases such as that of Juan Manuel Corchado. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics were applied. Results: The following were identified: a) Manipulation of the impact factor through citation cartels and excessive self-citation, b) Increase in predatory journals, and c) Emergence of "ghost citations" as a negative consequence of the use of AI. Conclusions: The cult of the impact factor has blurred the understanding of what science is. We propose adopting responsible metrics (DORA), strengthening science sustainability tools, starting with verification (DOAJ, SciELO), and continuing with the promotion of institutional policies that focus on scientific integrity rather than quantitative indicators.