Weekend reads: Jailed for speaking the truth; sexual harassment allegations at the Salk; children at risk in trials

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance.

The week at Retraction Watch featured a debate over a flawed climate change paper, seven new retractions for a researcher under fire, and two chemists duking it out over credit for a 30-year-old technique. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, sign up for an email every time there’s a new post (look for the “follow” button at the lower right part of your screen), or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].

4 thoughts on “Weekend reads: Jailed for speaking the truth; sexual harassment allegations at the Salk; children at risk in trials”

    1. I know this is a dead horse I should have stopped beating long ago, but although Inside Higher Education‘s style manual apparently allows their staff to write “Sternberg refuted many of the claims against him in a formal response to the Association for Psychological Science”, what he did was deny “many of the claims”, not refute them.

  1. Dr. Tan Qindong: thank you, sir, for representing the highest calling of the medical profession.

  2. Please note: while there are many valid discussions to be had regarding the design, conduct, and execution of RCT’s, the article discussed above (Krauss) is a disaster and several of the statements are just outright wrong. This article is not something to be taken as a serious discussion of RCT’s.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.