The week at Retraction Watch featured a look at what happens to authors when a journal is delisted, a reminder of how hard it is to figure out whether a paper has been retracted, and a survey on how common plagiarism is in economics. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: A new plagiarism euphemism; how Photoshop abuse destroys science; bias against women authors
Author: Ivan Oransky
Weekend reads: 20th anniversary of a fraud; uses and misuses of doubt; how common is scooping?
Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support it?
The week at Retraction Watch featured the story of how two highly cited papers turned out to be wrong; a big prize for a researcher who has been dogged by allegations; and a mass resignation at a journal. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: 20th anniversary of a fraud; uses and misuses of doubt; how common is scooping?
Retraction Watch is back at full speed. Here’s what you need to do to make sure you’re seeing our content.
Our readers will likely know that the site has been having significant trouble for more than two weeks. Thanks for your patience, your offers to help, and for sticking with us during that time. We’re happy to say that we seem to have identified all of the various issues involved, and have solved them. Some of those fixes may mean that you’ll need to resubscribe to our email alerts, so keep reading (or skip over the vaguely technical stuff in the next few paragraphs if you’d rather). Continue reading Retraction Watch is back at full speed. Here’s what you need to do to make sure you’re seeing our content.
Weekend reads: Automated image duplication detection?; journal editor frustrations; cash for catching errors
We seem to be past the worst of our technical issues, so thanks for your patience with us over the past few weeks. (Some of the fixes came at a cost, so we would be remiss if we did not ask readers to consider a donation to support our work.)
The week at Retraction Watch featured coverage of a now-dropped lawsuit against PNAS, how much it costs to have a PhD dissertation written for you, and findings of misconduct by a top academic recruit. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Automated image duplication detection?; journal editor frustrations; cash for catching errors
Weekend reads: We’re back! (We hope); the data thugs; heroes of retraction
As many of our readers will know, we’ve been having serious technical issues with the site. We’re cautiously optimistic that they’ve been solved, so although we’re still working on fixes, we’re going to try posting again. Thanks for your ongoing patience.
This week, we posted at our sister site, Embargo Watch. Here are those posts:
- “Major advance” in solar power retracted for reproducibility issues
- Should a journal retract a paper the authors didn’t know contained bad data?
- Author retracts Nature paper on Asia’s glaciers flagged for data error
- Six days after publication, paper is flagged. By day 11, it’s retracted.
And here’s what’s been happening elsewhere over the past few weeks: Continue reading Weekend reads: We’re back! (We hope); the data thugs; heroes of retraction
Most board members of journal resign to protest new editor, layoffs
![](https://retractionwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Ganten.jpg)
Nearly all of the editorial board members of a 150-year-old journal about the molecular underpinnings of medicine and disease have resigned their posts, protesting changes by publisher SpringerNature that they say “jeopardized the future and scholarly legacy of the Journal.”
In a December 1 letter, led by the three former editors in chief of the Journal of Molecular Medicine — Detlev Ganten, Gregg Semenza and Thomas Sommer — more than 70 then-editorial board members raised two objections: closing a small editorial office and laying off staff, and unilaterally appointing a new editor.
Regarding the decision to close the office at the Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine (MDC) Berlin Buch, where it has been since 1995, the editors and board members wrote: Continue reading Most board members of journal resign to protest new editor, layoffs
MD Anderson: No, we did not co-sponsor this cancer conference
![](https://retractionwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Aggarwal-Photo-683x1024.jpg)
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, of Houston, is asking a conference on cancer in Chennai, India to stop claiming it is a co-sponsor.
The meeting was the subject of a story in The New Indian Express, which reported that Baba Ramdev, a prominent yogi “who had claimed that cancer is divine justice for sins committed,” would be the chief guest at the meeting. Ramdev is scheduled to address the conference for 45 minutes this Thursday, its opening day.
As the story noted, one of the organizers of the meeting is Bharat Aggarwal, a former MD Anderson faculty member who has had to retract 18 papers, mostly for image manipulation.
I raised concerns about the conference yesterday (Sunday) on Twitter. MD Anderson responded within hours to say first that they were looking into the matter, and then to say that while it had sponsored the conference in the past, it was not sponsoring it this year: Continue reading MD Anderson: No, we did not co-sponsor this cancer conference
The RW Week In Review: Anti-gay bias, an authorship lawsuit; misconduct in industry vs. academia
We’ve been having some technical issues with the site, which may have kept some readers from accessing our content this week. We think we’ve figured out what was wrong, and fixed it, but in the meantime here’s what we were up to this week, in case you missed it:
Weekend reads: Papers from prison; profs’ kids as co-authors; a history journal flap
The week at Retraction Watch featured a look at whether scientists in industry or academia admit to more misconduct, another strange publication twist for a vaccine study, and the correction of a study that claimed anti-gay attitudes could take more than a decade off of gay peoples’ lifespans. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Papers from prison; profs’ kids as co-authors; a history journal flap
Weekend reads: What’s wrong with peer review; a retraction poem; how journal formats mangle science
The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a paper on the effects of fracking, authors who retracted a paper when they realized they’d been studying the wrong species, and a story about why a paper linked to an alleged doping scandal in Norway was retracted. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: