Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Weekend reads: The year’s top retractions; quoting Trump leads to a firing; life without Elsevier journals

with one comment

This week at Retraction Watch featured revelations about a frequent co-author of the world’s retraction record holder, and a prison term for fraud. 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 24th, 2016 at 9:30 am

Posted in weekend reads

  • Anon December 24, 2016 at 11:57 am

    The major problem with file drawer bias is not that statistically non-significant studies are not reported. Rather, it is the issue of an author conducting a study and not reporting the negative results. By having a repository of negative research (such as the Journal of Negative Results), one may search to see if they are about to proceed down a fruitless road. Without this potential for foresight, there may be a significant waste of time and resources.

  • Post a comment

    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.