Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work?
The week at Retraction Watch featured:
- Police investigating after Polish journal accuses authors of ‘crime of plagiarism’
- Judge orders OSU cancer researcher to pay $1 million to lawyers from failed libel suit
- Japanese university asks surgeon to retract eight ‘fraudulent’ papers
- Russian publishing watchdog decries ‘retraction misuse’ following ban on ‘LGBT propaganda’
- Was a paper from Taiwan retracted because of a geopolitical dispute?
Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to 285. There are more than 38,000 retractions in our database — which powers retraction alerts in EndNote, LibKey, Papers, 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):
- “Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists.”
- “Study debunks idea that Covid trials cut clinical corners.”
- “Do journals need societies, and do societies need journals?”
- “Mistakes happen in research papers. But corrections often don’t.”
- “Retraction (mal)practices of elite marketing and social psychology journals in the Dirk Smeesters’ research misconduct case.”
- “Alzheimer’s drug saga prompts journal to scrutinize whistle-blowers.”
- “Issues with Ethics in Research – A Case Study of the IHU Mediterranee Infection.”
- “‘Institute for scientific facts’ aims to smash fake news.”
- “Oops. After ten years and 1,000 studies, epigeneticists uncover trouble in their tool box.”
- “Jot is a free and open-source web application that matches manuscripts in the fields of biomedicine and life sciences with suitable journals…”
- “Academic writing is transforming – into comics, podcasts, installations – but that doesn’t mean bog-standard peer-reviewed papers are less key to institutional status or individual promotion.”
- Paper mills hit the press in Thailand.
- A university “‘plagiarism-for-profit’ probe” is launched in Thailand.
- “The Preprint Club – A cross-institutional, community-based approach to peer reviewing.”
- “Policing of fraudulent conference proceedings needs collaboration.”
- A journal edited by kids “pushes scientists for clear writing on complex topics.”
- What’s the best way to improve correction in science?
- “Do you want to publish an article in a scientific journal? Easy. Pay a few hundred dollars and receive an article ready for submission.”
- A call for transparency about software used to detect image manipulation.
- “Citation of studies by research fraudsters in medical journals.”
- “A Conflict of Interests–Manipulating Peer Review or Research as Usual?”
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 [email protected].