Weekend reads: How a rejected study led to a $3.8 million grant; a ‘nasty’ publishing scheme; the ‘darker side of science’

Would you consider a donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work?

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to more than 300. There are now 40,000 retractions in our database — which powers retraction alerts in EndNoteLibKeyPapers, and Zotero. The Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker now contains 200 titles. 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.

One thought on “Weekend reads: How a rejected study led to a $3.8 million grant; a ‘nasty’ publishing scheme; the ‘darker side of science’”

  1. a slap in the face to all the genuine, honest, hardworking scientists who report the facts. These criminals create data in order to secure their next grants; this is outright fraud, and they should be imprisoned. It is our responsibility to call these con artists out and hold them accountable for their crimes.

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Your email address will not be published.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.