Search Results for: nature

Congrats! Your paper was accepted. (Except if the acceptance letter was forged.)

You’ve worked hard on your research, spent time writing it up, and finally, the good news comes: The journal you submitted to has accepted your paper. Trouble is, for multiple authors, that good news turns bad — the acceptance was fake. Recently, in Scholarly Kitchen, Angela Cochran,  Associate Publisher, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), … Continue reading Congrats! Your paper was accepted. (Except if the acceptance letter was forged.)

See a paper you like? PubPeer wants to help you create a “journal” around it

Not everyone is happy with journals these days — researchers in artificial intelligence have announced they were boycotting a new Nature journal for being subscription-only, and universities are cancelling subscriptions over fees. The founders of PubPeer — a site dedicated to commentary about already published papers — are trying a different approach. Today, the PubPeer … Continue reading See a paper you like? PubPeer wants to help you create a “journal” around it

Weekend reads: Ghostwritten thesis apps; discriminatory authorship rules; group up to 14 retractions

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction featured a paper by Kim Kardashian, four retractions for an author who … Continue reading Weekend reads: Ghostwritten thesis apps; discriminatory authorship rules; group up to 14 retractions

Weekend reads: Science is “show me,” not “trust me;” pressure to publish survey data; what peer review misses

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured the University of Alabama’s request for 20 retractions of papers … Continue reading Weekend reads: Science is “show me,” not “trust me;” pressure to publish survey data; what peer review misses

U.S. government research watchdog pulls newsletter without explanation

The U.S. Office of Research Integrity has removed an issue of its quarterly newsletter, without including a public notice explaining why. The main website for the newsletter — published since 1993 — is now missing the March 2017 edition. A spokesperson for the agency told Retraction Watch:

Sturgeon researcher nets 13 retractions for fake peer review

A fish scientist in Iran has now lost 13 papers about the properties of Sturgeon sperm — try saying that five times fast — and other ichthyological topics over concerns about faked peer review. The three most recent retractions come from the Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition. According to the notice:

Weekend reads: How to get away with scientific fraud; what’s wrong with nutrition research; a second chance after misconduct

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured a collaboration with Undark looking at how scientists who commit … Continue reading Weekend reads: How to get away with scientific fraud; what’s wrong with nutrition research; a second chance after misconduct

What took more than five years? Elsevier retracts 20 papers by world’s most prolific fraudster

In 2012, investigations found that researcher Yoshitaka Fujii had fabricated well in excess of 100 papers, and recommended scores of retractions. Yet years later, publishers are still cleaning the literature of his problematic work.   For anyone not familiar the Fujii case: After researchers raised concerns about Fujii’s work, an anesthesiologist used statistical tools to … Continue reading What took more than five years? Elsevier retracts 20 papers by world’s most prolific fraudster

Weekend reads: Vaccine-neurological damage paper retracted under protest; buy a PhD thesis for $10,000; retraction by press release?

Before we present this week’s Weekend Reads, a question: Do you enjoy our weekly roundup? If so, we could really use your help. Would you consider a tax-deductible donation to support Weekend Reads, and our daily work? Thanks in advance. The week at Retraction Watch featured a three-part series about what happened when a team tried … Continue reading Weekend reads: Vaccine-neurological damage paper retracted under protest; buy a PhD thesis for $10,000; retraction by press release?

The mystery of the mistaken retraction is solved — sort of

We finally have some clarity on the case of the erroneous retraction over at the Annals of Surgical Oncology. Last week, we reported that the journal, and its publisher, Springer Nature, were having some trouble with a retracted presentation from a 2017 cancer meeting. Turns out, the issue involved crossed wires for similar articles in … Continue reading The mystery of the mistaken retraction is solved — sort of