Weekend reads: Fringe race science and journals; flags for Stanford president’s papers; rise and fall of peer review

Would you consider a 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Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 279. There are more than 37,000 retractions in our database — which powers retraction alerts in EndNoteLibKeyPapers, and Zotero. And have you seen our leaderboard of authors with the most retractions lately — or our list of top 10 most highly cited retracted papers?

Here’s what was happening elsewhere (some of these items may be paywalled, metered access, or require free registration to read):

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.

4 thoughts on “Weekend reads: Fringe race science and journals; flags for Stanford president’s papers; rise and fall of peer review”

  1. Angela Saini’s article is nothing but name calling. If you disagree with a scientific conclusion, the correct response is to conduct further research.

    1. Better research has been done, again and again and again. People don’t publish or evangelize racism because of a thorough examination of the data, they start with racism. How many times was Rushton’s work rebutted? He never responded to these, unlike the norms of scholarship.
      Consider starting here: https://img3.reoveme.com/m/a3946b0ab2471614.pdf
      https://www.proquest.com/openview/3d103838b1dcad41972eb8f7c4f24ccb/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=30756

    2. Saini’s article looked at the sources of funding for eugenicists and “race scientists” and their favored journals. If you disagree with the results of her research, the correct response is to conduct your own research into the sources of funding.

  2. I presume the fringe race science junk journals are OpenPsych –
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenPsych
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/OpenPsych_pseudojournals
    Emil Kirkegaard who set these bogus journals up is also associated with a fake university / diploma mill named GegenUni:
    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/GegenUni
    He recently changed his legal name to William Engman since he is a perjuror in contempt of court who is being sued for unpaid legal costs. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Emil_O._W._Kirkegaard

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.