Weekend reads: ‘Objectionable conditions’ at psychiatry institute; impact factor obsession; Nobel winner acknowledges more errors

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

The week at Retraction Watch featured:

• Chief researcher at national Japanese institute has paper retracted for faking data
• Exclusive: ‘Bust Size and Hitchhiking’ author to earn four more expressions of concern
• Paper claiming vaping tops nicotine gum for smoking cessation retracted from JAMA journal
• High-profile ob-gyn accused of duplicating data threatens to sue critic
• Embattled researcher Didier Raoult earns more than 100 expressions of concern and another retraction
• Cureus reviewing paper alleged to plagiarize Lancet article

Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up past 400. There are more than 48,000 retractions in The Retraction Watch Database — which is now part of Crossref. The Retraction Watch Hijacked Journal Checker now contains more than 250 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? What about The Retraction Watch Mass Resignations List — or our list of papers with evidence they were written by ChatGPT?

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

• “FDA describes ‘objectionable conditions’ at New York State Psychiatric Institute.”
• “The ethical and social effects of the obsession over Journal Impact Factor.”
• “Impact factors are outdated, but new research assessments still fail scientists.”
• “Nobel Prize winner acknowledges errors in three more papers.”
• Moses Bility, a former professor at the University of Pittsburgh who sued the institution for racial discrimination and retaliation has had most, but not all, of his complaints dismissed. Bility is now at Howard University.
• “Drug Company’s Libel Lawsuit Against Scientists Dismissed.” The magistrate judge has a PhD in zoology.
• “Retractions in arts and humanities: an analysis of the retraction notices.”
• “Notre Dame reports 75 lab mice died after dose doubled in drug research. Feds alerted.”
• “It’s Ariely time! They had a preregistration but they didn’t follow it.”
• “Uncertainty is Science’s Super Power. Make It Yours, Too.”
• “Empowering Student Authorship in Synthetic Biology.”
• “China’s universities just grabbed 6 of the top 10 spots in one worldwide science ranking – without changing a thing.”
• “AI reveals huge amounts of fraud in medical research.”
• “All articles published in the Future Healthcare Journal authored by Jeannie Watkins should have stated as a declaration of interest that she is a director of the recruitment organisation PAs Transforming Healthcare (PATH) with a 10% share holding.”
• Experts worry Francesca Gino’s lawsuit for defamation will silence critics.
• Researchers “found an issue with a specific type of brain imaging study.” Then the backlash started.
• Sleuth Nick Wise is a winner of the 2024 Dorothy Bishop Prize. More about his work here.
• How often are retracted papers in orthopedics still cited?
• “Navigating the Retraction Minefield in China and Beyond: A Need for Systemic Changes and Increased Focus on Researcher Well-Being.”
• “A structured, journal-led peer-review mentoring program enhances peer review training.”
• “Black Scholars Face Anonymous Accusations in Anti-DEI Crusade.”
• “Personal Misconduct Elicits Harsher Professional Consequences for Artists (vs. Scientists).”
• “Should research administrators be regulated as carefully as researchers?”
• “In a bold bid to avoid open-access fees, Gates foundation says grantees must post preprints.”
• “Anthropologists take up arms against ‘race science.’”
• “Scientific fraud is so shocking because we do not normally assume a researcher has made up or altered data.”
• “The impact of researchers’ perceived pressure on their publication strategies.”
• “It’s a terrifying conversation, where he lays bare the outright fraud in medical publishing.” Our Ivan Oransky appears on the PicPod podcast.
• “FoSci —  The Emerging Field of Forensic Scientometrics.”
• “Should publishers flag replication failures in the same way they flag retractions?”
• “Daily Caller Retracts Article That Launched Phony Easter Outrage Cycle.”

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 [email protected].