Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:PubPeer Selections: “Meta-rant” about Science paper; posting raw data satisfies critics; was gel splicing ever OK?
Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:Category: pubpeer selections
Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:PubPeer Selections: Retracted papers, published elsewhere
Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections: Continue reading PubPeer Selections: Retracted papers, published elsewhere
PubPeer Selections: Boosting memory in Science, extending lifespan in Nature, quantum anesthesia in PNAS
As Retraction Watch readers probably know, we’re big fans of PubPeer, the post-publication peer review site that allows comments on papers. Discussions there have led to a number of corrections and retractions, and even more importantly, authors are starting to respond to clarify results, acknowledge errors, or otherwise advance knowledge. After all, as we often note, there’s a long way between raising questions about a study and retracting it.
With all of that in mind, we’re pleased to launch a new weekly post that will be called “PubPeer Selections” in which we’ll highlight featured discussions on PubPeer. Here’s the first installment: Continue reading PubPeer Selections: Boosting memory in Science, extending lifespan in Nature, quantum anesthesia in PNAS