Weekend reads: A new retraction record; corrections by Harvard president; when patents cite retracted papers

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Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up to over 375. There are more than 45,000 retractions in The Retraction Watch Database — which is now part of Crossref. The Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker now contains well over 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? Or The Retraction Watch Mass Resignations List?

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, subscribe to our free daily digest or paid weekly update, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, or add us to your RSS reader. If you find a retraction that’s not in The Retraction Watch Database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at team@retractionwatch.com.

5 thoughts on “Weekend reads: A new retraction record; corrections by Harvard president; when patents cite retracted papers”

  1. “Harvard president corrects two papers after plagiarism allegations.”

    Are they really “allegations” if she is making corrections?

    1. Well, they were allegations at the time the first article was written, and there are still outstanding concerns.
      While the University has been quick to act on (some of) these plagiarism concerns, I wonder if there are students (or former students), whose cases of possible plagiarism were treated the same. Looking at the examples in the linked article, this does not look like accidental incidents to me.

  2. UNSW being investigated by ARIC is not news. UNSW is -always- being investigated by ARIC (or being reviewed by or appealed to, whatever ARIC actually does). Anyway, the article says ARIC has 11 cases, so that means ARIC spends a fifth of its time on UNSW, but only 2 of UNSW’s 80+ complaints each year are looked at by ARIC (see their report linked below). So I am not sure what ARIC investigating UNSW will do since ARIC generally doesn’t seem to do anything (11 investigations a year isn’t even 1 per Australian university). Just more red tape.


  3. “Work of autism researcher questioned again.”
    “A neuroscientist whose work in autism and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder has previously come under fire is once again under scrutiny.”
    Gerry Leisman is a chiropractor, with prior form for “misrepresenting his academic credentials and professional experience and awarded patents“. Perhaps he calls himself a neuroscientist now.

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.