The week at Retraction Watch featured an inscrutable retraction notice, and a raft of new retractions for a cancer researcher who once threatened to sue us. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Manuscript submission headaches; Trophy Generation goes to grad school; is science fucked?
Category: weekend reads
Weekend reads: “Research parasite” doubling down; racism in the lab; clinical trial insider trading
The week at Retraction Watch saw news of a settled lawsuit, and had us celebrating our sixth anniversary with the announcement of a new partnership. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: “Research parasite” doubling down; racism in the lab; clinical trial insider trading
Weekend reads: What lurks in clinical trial databases; plagiarism by Russian ministers; why journals shy away from fraud allegations
The week at Retraction Watch featured a PhD student expelled for submitting a paper without her co-authors’ permission, and a look at the six types of peer reviewers. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: What lurks in clinical trial databases; plagiarism by Russian ministers; why journals shy away from fraud allegations
Weekend reads: Lying academics; journals to blame for bad behavior; why bad science is funded
The week at Retraction Watch featured a first in transparency from Canada, and the second retraction for a fan of a conspiracy theory. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Lying academics; journals to blame for bad behavior; why bad science is funded
Weekend reads: More Impact Factor scrutiny; $10 million fine for overbilling; protected Canadian fraudsters
The week at Retraction Watch featured the loss of a Harvard researcher’s PhD for misconduct, and the harrowing tale of a whistleblower. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: More Impact Factor scrutiny; $10 million fine for overbilling; protected Canadian fraudsters
Weekend reads: Unscientific peer review; impact factor revolt; men love to cite themselves
The week at Retraction Watch featured a puzzle, and the retraction of a controversial study on fracking. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Unscientific peer review; impact factor revolt; men love to cite themselves
Weekend reads: Publisher under fire; Canadian scientists demand change; a troubled psychiatry trial
The week at Retraction Watch featured an unwitting co-author and a painful example of doing the right thing. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Publisher under fire; Canadian scientists demand change; a troubled psychiatry trial
Weekend reads: Open data’s downsides; do journals serve a purpose?; fraud allegations down in China
The week at Retraction Watch featured news that a religion journal wouldn’t be retracting a paper despite evidence of forgery in the evidence it relied on, and also news that we’re hiring. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Open data’s downsides; do journals serve a purpose?; fraud allegations down in China
Weekend reads: Naughty journals; whistleblowers’ frustration; new misconduct definition?
The week at Retraction Watch featured revelations of fraud in more than $100 million in government research, and swift findings in a much-discussed case. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Naughty journals; whistleblowers’ frustration; new misconduct definition?
Weekend reads: Idiotic reviews; wrong metrics in China; questions about preprints
The week at Retraction Watch featured the corrections of papers claiming that conservative beliefs were linked to psychotic traits, and a new member of our leaderboard, from philosophy. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Idiotic reviews; wrong metrics in China; questions about preprints