Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Weekend reads: Paying peer reviewers; the embargo debate; crushed by data

with one comment

booksThis week at Retraction Watch featured some big numbers: How a request to correct a single paper turned into 19 retractions, and 18 tips for giving horrible presentations. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, sign up on our homepage for an email every time there’s a new post, or subscribe to our daily digest. Click here to review our Comments Policy. For a sneak peek at what we’re working on, click here.

Written by Ivan Oransky

December 3rd, 2016 at 9:30 am

Posted in weekend reads

Comments
  • Andrew Dalke December 5, 2016 at 9:43 am

    ORCID is run by a US organization, which is why the terms of use reflect their legal requirement to follow US embargo law: “If you are prohibited from receiving U.S. origin services or software, you may not use the Websites or Registry.” How does this restriction, when combined with an increasing requirement to have an ORCID, affect the ability to publish for researchers in embargoed countries like Cuba?

  • Post a comment

    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.