A paper on “the role of conspiracist ideation in climate denial” whose puzzling publication (and retraction) history formed the basis of a series of Retraction Watch posts in 2013 and 2014 is back, as part of a new article in a different journal. Retraction Watch readers may recall a paper published in 2013 in Frontiers … Continue reading Recursive recursiveness: Retracted Lewandowsky et al conspiracy ideation study republished
Last week, we covered the complicated story of a paper by Stephan Lewandowsky and colleagues that had been removed — or at least all but the abstract — from its publisher’s site. Our angle on the story was how Frontiers, which publishes Frontiers in Personality Science and Individual Differences, where the study appeared, had handled … Continue reading Update: Lewandowsky et al paper on conspiracist ideation “provisionally removed” due to complaints
Last year, Stephan Lewandowsky and colleagues posted a paper, scheduled for an upcoming issue of Psychological Science, with a, shall we say, provocative title: NASA Faked the Moon Landing—Therefore, (Climate) Science Is a Hoax An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science In an interview last year with Lewandowsky, NPR gathered some of the reactions … Continue reading Why publishers should explain why papers disappear: The complicated Lewandowsky study saga
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 The week at Retraction Watch featured: Our list of retracted or withdrawn COVID-19 papers is up past 400. There are more than 47,000 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 … Continue reading Weekend reads: That paper (yes, that one) is retracted; China reviewing 17,000 retractions; a Columbia surgeon and flawed data
Over the years, many papers have cited the work of Retraction Watch, whether a blog post, an article we’ve written for another outlet, or our database. Here’s a selection. Know of one we’ve missed? Let us know at [email protected]. Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like … Continue reading Papers that cite Retraction Watch
First it was there. Now it’s gone. In March 2018, three researchers at Atatürk University in Turkey published“Investigation Of The Critical Factors Affecting E-Government Acceptance: A Systematic Review And A Conceptual Model” at the Innovative Journal of Business and Management, where it was freely available during 2018. It has no DOI, and no citations (that … Continue reading A “clandestine retraction” as a paper disappears from a management journal without a trace
Title: Internet Blogs, Polar Bears, and Climate-Change Denial by Proxy What Caught Our Attention: There’s a lot going on here, so bear with us. (Ba-dum-bum.) First, there was the paper itself, co-authored by, among others, Michael Mann and Stephan Lewandowsky. Both names may be familiar to Retraction Watch readers. Mann is a prominent climate scientist … Continue reading Caught Our Notice: Climate change leads to more…neurosurgery for polar bears?
The week at Retraction Watch featured an unusual warning from the New England Journal of Medicine, and the withdrawal of a paper over a fear of legal threats. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
The week at Retraction Watch featured a case of a disappearing journal, lots of bad news for Olivier Voinnet, and advice on what to do when you make a mistake. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:
It’s been another busy week at Retraction Watch, mostly because of the unfolding Jens Förster story. Here’s what was happening elsewhere on the web: