The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of an entire issue of a journal and a renewable energy researcher agree to retract ten papers for recycling, and saw The Australian put us on its list of “30 Most Influential” in higher education for 2016. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Science press releases under fire; a new plagiarism excuse; win $1,000
Category: weekend reads
Weekend reads: A celebrity surgeon’s double life; misconduct in sports medicine; researcher loses honor
This week at Retraction Watch featured a literally bullshit excuse for fake data, a new record for time from publication to retraction, and news of an upcoming retraction from Science. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: A celebrity surgeon’s double life; misconduct in sports medicine; researcher loses honor
Weekend reads: Why authors keep citing retracted studies; patients over papers; final ruling in Hwang case
Here’s our first post of 2016. The week at Retraction Watch featured a retraction from JAMA, and our list of most-cited retracted papers. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Why authors keep citing retracted studies; patients over papers; final ruling in Hwang case
Weekend reads: NFL, NIH butt heads on concussion research; should all papers be anonymous?
The week at Retraction Watch featured our annual roundup of the year’s top retractions for The Scientist, a retraction from Science, and claims about a book Aristotle never wrote. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: NFL, NIH butt heads on concussion research; should all papers be anonymous?
Weekend reads: 179 researchers indicted; how to reject a rejection; breaking the law on clinical trial data
The week at Retraction Watch featured more installments in the seemingly never-ending story of fake peer reviews. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: 179 researchers indicted; how to reject a rejection; breaking the law on clinical trial data
Weekend reads: What do PhDs earn?; university refuses to release data; collaboration’s dark side
This week at Retraction Watch featured a look at the huge problem of misidentified cell lines, a check-in with a company that retracted a paper as it was about to go public, and Diederik Stapel’s 58th retraction. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: What do PhDs earn?; university refuses to release data; collaboration’s dark side
Weekend reads: Retraction reluctance; worthless papers (and stats); too many PhDs
The week at Retraction Watch featured a new grant to our parent non-profit organization, a retraction from the NEJM, and our first-ever retraction. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Retraction reluctance; worthless papers (and stats); too many PhDs
Weekend reads: Criminal charges for plagiarism; NFL scientific interference; the authorship explosion
The week at Retraction Watch featured a move by the Journal of Biological Chemistry that we’re applauding, a retraction by a high-profile nutrition researcher, and an announcement about a new partnership to create a retraction database. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Criminal charges for plagiarism; NFL scientific interference; the authorship explosion
Weekend reads: Papers de-emphasized for funding; reproducibility revolution; reining in fraud in China
The week at Retraction Watch featured a particularly misleading retraction notice, and a university stripping a graduate of her PhD for misconduct. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: Papers de-emphasized for funding; reproducibility revolution; reining in fraud in China
Weekend reads: The end of journals?; Impact Factor for sale; fake peer reviews earn funding bans
This morning, our thoughts are with the people of Paris. The week at Retraction Watch featured the retraction of a paper claiming dramatically higher rates of sexual trauma among men in the military, and a look at whether gender plays a role in peer review. Also: We’re hiring. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: The end of journals?; Impact Factor for sale; fake peer reviews earn funding bans