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:
- Paper on canine gastrointestinal illness dogged by lack of disclosures
- Scholar with a history of making up author names has a 1985 paper corrected
- Student of yoga tourism won’t get PhD as he earns five retractions
- Researchers sound alarm on ‘predatory’ rankings
- Paper on sexual orientation and neuropsychiatric disorders earns an expression of concern
- Pentagon-funded Duke research on soldier brain damage under investigation
Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 200. There are now more than 31,000 retractions in our database — which now powers retraction alerts in EndNote, Papers, and Zotero. And have you seen our leaderboard of authors with the most retractions lately?
Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):
- Nearly 300 scientists in China have been sanctioned for publishing fraudulent papers.
- “Trial of Harvard chemist poses test for U.S. government’s controversial China Initiative.”
- “There’s one reason why most finance research is phony.”
- “Preprint Papers and Prefigurative Politics.”
- “Breast surgeon found guilty of cheating to get doctorate.”
- “Should we trust what Pfizer tells us about its vaccine and omicron?”
- “The results suggest growing adoption of open science practices but also highlight a number of important impediments.”
- “Women largely absent from Asian highly cited lists.”
- A study of linguistics textbooks “shows that there is an evident gender bias that favors the representation of men.”
- A publisher in Japan says there was plagiarism in two of its history books.
- “Some Cancer Studies Fail to Replicate. That Might Be OK.”
- “Understand the real reasons reproducibility reform fails.”
- “Chinese drama apologizes after being accused of plagiarizing Japanese series ‘Legal High’ poster.”
- The problem with metaphor-based metaheuristics. And a bestiary of such metaheuristics.
- “Does research need a replication stamp?”
- “‘It’s misinformation at worst.’ Weak health studies can do more harm than good, scientists say.”
- The Journal of the National Cancer Institute has corrected a paper four years after a BMJ journal yanked criticism of it for fear of lawsuits.
- Andrew Gelman on the latest hoax.
- “Who bears the responsibility for ethical misconduct in scientific research collaborations?”
- “A debate about the nature of science has become a litmus test for academic freedom in New Zealand, as some leading scholars face possible expulsion from the country’s learned academy.”
- “‘Everyone knew!’ Problems with UW-Madison prof who led ‘toxic’ lab persisted for 2 decades.”
- “Maltese Dean Denies ‘Wilful Misdoing’ After Colleague Accuses Him Of Plagiarising His Work.”
- “Questionable Research Practices and Open Science in Quantitative Criminology.”
- “Violation of research integrity principles occur more often than we think.”
- “Archaeologist accused of bullying is reinstated at Max Planck institute.”
- “Scholarly communication in times of crisis: The response of the scholarly communication system to the COVID-19 pandemic.”
- “But are journal impact factors really as meaningless as is claimed?”
- “Ethical issues cloud case report of unproven stem cell therapy for autism.”
- Our Ivan Oransky’s oral evidence for the UK House of Commons’ Science and Technology Committee for an inquiry on reproducibility and research integrity.
Like Retraction Watch? You can make a one-time tax-deductible contribution by PayPal or by Square, or a monthly tax-deductible donation by Paypal 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 [email protected].