Weekend reads: The black market for papers; the secret life of retractions; a ‘troublesome pattern’

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Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to nearly 350. There are now 41,000 retractions in our database — which powers retraction alerts in EdifixEndNoteLibKeyPapers, 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.

2 thoughts on “Weekend reads: The black market for papers; the secret life of retractions; a ‘troublesome pattern’”

  1. Hi,
    Thanks for your hard work. (I wonder if I could volunteer my time.)
    Have you ever wondered that “controlled opposition” may apply to at least some of these publications? I’ve been immersing myself in the Covid-related scam(s), so I have seen both the breadth and depth of deception.

  2. “I have been contacted by a whistleblower with a remarkable story of corruption of the academic peer-review process involving a paper published in 2022.”
    Reader, beware: the journal in question is The European Physical Journal Plus. For what it is worth, the journal deserves a bit of scrutiny.
    Opening a random issue in this journal, https://link.springer.com/journal/13360/volumes-and-issues/138-2, one encounters two articles by one Salvatore Capozziello, spotted earlier on PubPeer: https://pubpeer.com/publications/3952526A5C1F22D3A61255CA09D396. The title of at least one of these two studies, “Focus point on tensions in cosmology from early to late universe: the value of the Hubble constant and the question of dark energy,” looks like overpromising at best.
    Then there is a study titled, “Origin and evolution of SARS-CoV-2,” https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjp/s13360-023-03719-6. Not sure if it is within the journal’s scope. And also an overpromising title.
    So, maybe, “A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming,” which “reviews the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on trends in weather extremes” is also within the scope.
    But I would apply some caution.

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.