The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a paper on homeopathy whose authors had been arrested; news about 30 retractions for an engineer in South Korea; and a story about how two stem cell researchers who left Harvard under a cloud are being recommended for roles at Italy’s NIH. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: No reproducibility crisis?; greatest corrections of all time; an archaeology fraud
Category: weekend reads
Weekend reads: A new plagiarism euphemism; how Photoshop abuse destroys science; bias against women authors
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at what happens to authors when a journal is delisted, a reminder of how hard it is to figure out whether a paper has been retracted, and a survey on how common plagiarism is in economics.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
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?
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
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:
Weekend reads: Why scientists respond badly to criticism; hidden retractions; journal cancels issue
The week at Retraction Watch featured a researcher whose ideas were stolen at least three times, a victory for Crossfit in its attempt to reveal peer reviewers, and the second delisting of a cancer journal by an index that praised it just months ago. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Why scientists respond badly to criticism; hidden retractions; journal cancels issue
Weekend reads: Why following up on fraud matters; how many retractions in 2017?; misleading abstracts
The week at Retraction Watch featured the world energy solution that wasn’t, a story about Elsevier and fake peer reviews, and a question from a readers about citing retracted papers. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Why following up on fraud matters; how many retractions in 2017?; misleading abstracts
Weekend Reads: A plagiarism fighter who plagiarizes; too much ado about reproducibility?; how scientists should be judged
Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, would you consider a year-end tax-deductible donation to support it?
The week at Retraction Watch featured an image so nice, it was used eight times, a co-author who forgot he’d used a figure elsewhere, and the 19th retraction for a researcher who tried to sue a PubPeer commenter. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend Reads: A plagiarism fighter who plagiarizes; too much ado about reproducibility?; how scientists should be judged