No question, 2013 has been a busy year at Retraction Watch. And no wonder: There have been more than 500 retractions in the scientific literature, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. We’ve posted roughly that many times, and had more than five million pageviews (thank you!).
So, to send 2013 off with a bang, The Scientist asked us to come up with our top ten retractions of the year. Here’s our list. Add your own, in comments on that post, or here.
Happy New Year!
Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on X or Bluesky, like us on Facebook, follow us on LinkedIn, 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].
Reblogged this on This Got My Attention and commented:
Bogus Science. Check out the authors’ Top 10 list of retractions
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/38743/title/Top-10-Retractions-of-2013/
Miss here some retraction related to Science Fraud blog.
Readers,
In my opinion, top of the list of papers that should be retracted in 2014 is the University of Sydney Charles Perkins Centre’s infamous Australian Paradox paper:
# http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/2014-02-09/5239418
# http://honisoit.com/2014/03/sweet-research-goes-sour/
# http://www.australianparadox.com/pdf/RRsubmission2inquiry.pdf
How long will the University of Sydney and its fledgling Charles Perkins Centre continue to defend this paper?
rgds,
rory