Just how common is positive publication bias? Here’s one researcher who’s trying to figure that out

While the presence of publication bias – the selective publishing of positive studies – in science is well known, debate continues about how extensive such bias truly is and the best way to identify it. The most recent entrant in the debate is a paper by Robbie van Aert and co-authors, who have published a … Continue reading Just how common is positive publication bias? Here’s one researcher who’s trying to figure that out

Weekend reads: Ghostwritten peer reviews; is failure to report results misconduct?; scientific sabotage common in at least one country

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 profile of an image detective who works for free; … Continue reading Weekend reads: Ghostwritten peer reviews; is failure to report results misconduct?; scientific sabotage common in at least one country

Meet Elisabeth Bik, who finds problematic images in scientific papers for free

Retraction Watch readers may know the name Elisabeth Bik, whose painstaking work inspecting tens of thousands of Western blot images has led to dozens of retractions in journals including PLOS ONE. Today in The Scientist, we profile Bik, a microbiologist who calls herself a “super-introvert.” Bik tells us:

Should a paper on mindfulness have been retracted? A co-author weighs in

Two weeks ago, we covered the retraction of a PLoS ONE paper on mindfulness following criticism — dating back to 2017 — by James Coyne. At the time, the corresponding author, Maria Hunink, of Erasmus and Harvard, had not responded to a request for comment. Hunink responded late last week, saying that she had been on … Continue reading Should a paper on mindfulness have been retracted? A co-author weighs in

Weekend reads: A U.S. gov’t memo on publishing leaves scientists in disbelief; money wasted on flawed research; an eye doctor whose research subjects were at risk

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 retraction of a paper on red wine, tea, and … Continue reading Weekend reads: A U.S. gov’t memo on publishing leaves scientists in disbelief; money wasted on flawed research; an eye doctor whose research subjects were at risk

Do wind turbines cause plagiarism? Energy researcher up to 20 retractions

The editors of PLoS ONE have done something that we’re betting Donald Trump will never do: Retract a statement about noisy wind turbines. The journal is pulling a 2014 article, titled “Adaptive neuro-fuzzy methodology for noise assessment of wind turbine,” after concluding that the researchers plagiarized. The corresponding author of the article is Shahaboddin Shamshirban, … Continue reading Do wind turbines cause plagiarism? Energy researcher up to 20 retractions

How one journal became a “major retraction engine”

If you think you’ve noticed more and more retractions at PLoS ONE recently, you’re not wrong. The journal retracted 53 papers last year. That’s not a record — that belongs to a journal that retracted more than 400 papers at once — nor is it that many more than the Journal of Biological Chemistry, which … Continue reading How one journal became a “major retraction engine”

“A new form of plagiarism:” When researchers fake co-authors’ names

There’s a new publishing trend in town, says Mario Biagioli: Faking co-authors’ names. Biagioli, distinguished professor of law and science and technology studies and director of the Center for Innovation Studies at the University of California, Davis, writes in an article in Trends in Chemistry that it’s “the emergence of a new form of plagiarism … Continue reading “A new form of plagiarism:” When researchers fake co-authors’ names

Maybe combining red wine and tea doesn’t kill tumors after all

According to the internet, Bear Grylls, the TV survivalist, said he “was always brought up to have a cup of tea at halfway up a rock face.” Which sounds too cute to be true and, given Grylls’ history of, um, buffing the hard edges of reality, almost certainly isn’t. But Grylls appears to be far … Continue reading Maybe combining red wine and tea doesn’t kill tumors after all

Weekend reads: Ousted at MD Anderson; an “under-recognized variety of plagiarism;” a data thug rolls again

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 revelations about a Harvard lab being investigated by federal officials; … Continue reading Weekend reads: Ousted at MD Anderson; an “under-recognized variety of plagiarism;” a data thug rolls again