Another busy week at Retraction Watch, which we kicked off by asking for your support. Have you contributed yet? Here’s what was happening elsewhere on the web:
Continue reading Weekend reads: Impact factor mania, male scientists citing themselves, insecure careers in academia
Category: studies about retractions
Journal editors, an NIH bioethicist wants to hear your experiences with retractions

David Resnik, a National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) bioethicist who has published on retractions and corrections, is apparently hoping to do so again. In a request for information that went out from the NIH last week, Resnik seeks: Continue reading Journal editors, an NIH bioethicist wants to hear your experiences with retractions
Dear Retraction Watch readers: We want to grow. Here’s how you can help
Gentle readers: Since August of 2010 when we launched Retraction Watch, you’ve showed us plenty of love, for which we are ever grateful. Your encouragement, story tips, and critiques are what make the site what it is. It’s great to know that we are providing you with a valuable source of information that has helped focus public attention on scientific misconduct and the process of self-correction.
Now, we’re hoping some of you will consider making a financial contribution. To continue to grow Retraction Watch, we will need resources. Please consider supporting our blog financially by becoming a paying subscriber at a modest level (or, if the spirit moves you, at an immodest level — we’ll take that, too!).
How will we use the money? Continue reading Dear Retraction Watch readers: We want to grow. Here’s how you can help
Weekend reads: STAP stem cell controversy grinds on, plagiarism puzzles
Another busy week here at Retraction Watch, with many in the scientific world glued to their browsers for more information on the latest stem cell controversy. Hear Ivan on the BBC discussing what that story means for post-publication peer review. Elsewhere around the web: Continue reading Weekend reads: STAP stem cell controversy grinds on, plagiarism puzzles
So what happened after Paul Brookes was forced to shut down Science-Fraud.org?

Retraction Watch readers will likely be familiar with the story of Paul Brookes, the University of Rochester researcher whose identity as the person behind Science-Fraud.org was revealed in January 2013. That revelation — and legal threats — forced Brookes to shutter Science-Fraud.org.
In a new illuminating interview in Science, Brookes discusses the legal threats he faced, how they curtailed his travel, and how his university responded, among other subjects.
The risks faced by whistleblowers are a constant thread on Retraction Watch. So did the site have an effect on his ability to do science? Continue reading So what happened after Paul Brookes was forced to shut down Science-Fraud.org?
Weekend reads: “Too much success” in psychology, why hoaxes aren’t the real problem in science
Another busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s what was happening elsewhere around the web in science publishing and research integrity news: Continue reading Weekend reads: “Too much success” in psychology, why hoaxes aren’t the real problem in science
Weekend reads: How much can one scientist publish? And more stem cell misconduct
Another busy week at Retraction Watch, including a ScienceOnline 2014 session Ivan facilitated on post-publication peer review. Here’s a selection of what was happening elsewhere on the web: Continue reading Weekend reads: How much can one scientist publish? And more stem cell misconduct
Weekend reads: A psychology researcher’s confession, a state senator’s plagiarism
Yet another busy week at Retraction Watch, with one of us taking part in a symposium on the future of science journalism for a few days. (See if you can find Ivan in this picture.) Here’s what was happening elsewhere on the web in science publishing and related issues: Continue reading Weekend reads: A psychology researcher’s confession, a state senator’s plagiarism
Retractions are useful for teaching science, say college profs
From time to time, we find online college syllabi among those sites referring us traffic, and some professors have told us that they use Retraction Watch in their classes. We’re pleased and humbled by that.
In a new paper published in the Journal of College Science Teaching, three professors at Clayton State University in Morrow, Georgia, discuss why retractions are good case studies for teaching ethics and examining the scientific process in class. Stephen Burnett, Richard H. Singiser, and Caroline Clower write: Continue reading Retractions are useful for teaching science, say college profs
Weekend reads: MIT professor accused of fraud, biologist who retracted paper suspended, and more
Another busy week at Retraction Watch, featuring lots of snow at HQ and a trip to take part in a conference in Davis, California. Here’s what was happening elsewhere on the web: Continue reading Weekend reads: MIT professor accused of fraud, biologist who retracted paper suspended, and more