Weekend reads: How to rescue science, what “censorship” really means, worst paper of the year?
Another very busy week at Retraction Watch. There were a lot of gems elsewhere. Here’s a sampling:
Search Results for: fraud
Weekend reads: Problems with a Science paper, how to cite properly (and improperly)
Another super-busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s what was happening in around the web in scientific publishing, misconduct, and related issues:
Following “personal attacks and threats,” Elsevier plant journal makes author persona non grata
An Elsevier journal has taken “the exceptional step of ceasing to communicate” with a scientist-critic after a series of “unfounded personal attacks and threats.” The move means that the journal, Scientia Horticulturae, will not review any papers that include the critic, Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, as an author. Here is the text of the letter … Continue reading Following “personal attacks and threats,” Elsevier plant journal makes author persona non grata
Weekend reads: Former ORI director speaks out; Is peer review broken?
Another busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s what was happening elsewhere on the web in scientific publishing and related issues:
MS paper second to fall following University of Queensland investigation
Two former University of Queensland researchers have lost another paper following an investigation into their work. In September, the university announced that a paper in the European Journal of Neurology by Bruce Murdoch and Caroline Barwood would be retracted because no primary data can be located, and no evidence has been found that the study … Continue reading MS paper second to fall following University of Queensland investigation
Does publicly questioning papers lead to more corrections and retractions?
As Retraction Watch readers will likely recall, Paul Brookes ran Science-Fraud.org anonymously until early 2013, when he was outed and faced legal threats that forced him to shut down the site. There are a lot of lessons to be drawn from the experience, some of which Brookes discussed with Science last month. Today, PeerJ published Brookes’ … Continue reading Does publicly questioning papers lead to more corrections and retractions?
First retraction appears for Dutch anthropologist Mart Bax
Last September we wrote about the case of Mart Bax, an anthropologist once of the Free University in Amsterdam who allegedly fabricated elements in some of his papers, and claimed to have written more than 60 that do not exist: Bax, who studied an Irish town he called Patricksville, a Dutch pilgrimage site he called … Continue reading First retraction appears for Dutch anthropologist Mart Bax
Scientists, do you feel bullied by critics? These chemists do
A new site, Stand Up 2 Science Bullies, launched last week: www.standup2sciencebullies.com is a forum for scientists to share their experience and provide advice pertaining to scientific bullying. We welcome questions and comments from all scientists including students, faculty, and members of industry. We sincerely hope that this forum will serve as an informative resource … Continue reading Scientists, do you feel bullied by critics? These chemists do
Some authors seem to cite their own retracted studies. Should we be concerned?
Some authors of retracted studies persist in citing their retracted work, according to a new study in Science and Engineering Ethics that calls the trend “very concerning.”
Weekend reads: Stem cell researchers falsifying data, neuroscience research forgets statistics tests
Another busy week at Retraction Watch. Here’s some of what was happening elsewhere on the web: