Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Weekend reads: Death of a cancer lab; women economists’ papers are more readable; self-correction grows

with 3 comments

The week at Retraction Watch featured a study of why researchers commit misconduct, and the story of former Northwestern scientist who sued the university for defamation. 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

April 15th, 2017 at 9:30 am

Posted in weekend reads

  • MannyHM April 15, 2017 at 12:57 pm

    These questionable characters without question saw in this cancer a place to hunt treasure, not cure. These researchers should have been protected from these predators. These researcher should be able to give almost 100 percent of their time, talent, and energy on the quest for cancer cure, not fighting and making deals with these wolves disguised as benefactors.

  • Klavs Hansen April 16, 2017 at 2:27 am

    No, female economists do not ‘write more readable papers than their male peers’. They write papers that are easier to read, by 1 to 6 %, because the average length of words is less. Whether or not this is a qualification per se can be discussed.
    But of course, you may think it is a criterion for faster publication. Then you just start your own journal.

  • From Morocco April 16, 2017 at 11:23 am

    A conference on “Predatory Publishers” will be held by JEFFERY BEALL, on Tuesday 18 April 2017, at Granada University, Spain.

  • Post a comment

    Threaded commenting powered by interconnect/it code.