Weekend reads: A pay-for-peer review movement; toxic PIs; why plagiarism is not a victimless crime

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:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 32.

Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, 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 team@retractionwatch.com.

6 thoughts on “Weekend reads: A pay-for-peer review movement; toxic PIs; why plagiarism is not a victimless crime”

  1. Adding China may be too much. But adding “Republic of China” is OK, if the journal has a strict format for authors’ address. Some Taiwan researchers just mix politics with academic issues.

    1. Given that the pressure comes from the journal not the authors, I think it’s the journal mixing academic and political concerns.

      And as stated in the article, the authors were asked to add “China”, implying “People’s Republic of China” or mainland China, rather than “Republic of China”. Elsewhere the article reports Taiwanese authors being asked to identify Taiwan as a “province of China”.

      1. Why does China only represent People’s Republic of China?
        Moreover, the author can choose not to submit her ms to the journal.

  2. Re: China

    This is a pretty standard disclaimer used by journals: “XXX Journal remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.”

    1. Well, this explains things;

      “Editorial policies

      The editorial policies of Eye and Vision are determined jointly by its Editorial Board and Springer Nature in accordance with the legal and regulatory requirements of China. Unless otherwise stipulated in these guidelines, all manuscripts submitted to Eye and Vision should adhere to BioMed Central’s editorial policies.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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