One of the suggestions we get regularly here at Retraction Watch is something along the lines of “This researcher publishes too much. You should look into that.” But how much is too much? The phenomenon was the subject of a 2015 paper. It’s also the subject of a new article in Nature by John Ioannidis, … Continue reading When it comes to authorship, how prolific is too prolific?
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 high-profile paper about cataract surgery and the risk of … Continue reading Weekend reads: China’s black market in publishing; no fraud in NgAgo gene editing work, says university; predatory journal crackdown
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 departure of a professor in Glasgow amidst three retraction; … Continue reading Weekend reads: Why rhetoric and self-censorship is bad for science; an author threatens to sue his critics; why whistleblowing is critical
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 story of a journal that took 13 months to … Continue reading Weekend reads: A gold star in astronomy; leading journals underrepresent women in photos; how papers can mislead
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, unfortunately, a likely DDOS attack that kept our site dark … Continue reading Weekend reads: “Chronic compulsive writing syndrome;” a new way to respond to rejection; rewards for a center that doesn’t yet exist
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 collection of reports of scientific misconduct investigations, the story … Continue reading Weekend reads: “Ethics dumping;” getting scientists to admit mistakes; the problem with conference dinner chatter
Is open peer review the future? The EMBO Journal has offered it since 2009. eLife offers it. They’re not alone, although they’re still in the minority (a fact Irene Hames wishes would change). Elsevier, one of the world’s largest publishers, has tried a pilot of it, too, so we thought it would be worth finding … Continue reading What happened when Elsevier tried open peer review? And which field says “no, thanks?”
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 look at a dozen scientific sleuths; the story of … Continue reading Weekend reads: Bragging about burying bad science; women still underrepresented in Nature; does brilliance justify bad behavior?
Retraction Watch readers may know Nathan Myhrvold, who holds a PhD in physics, as the former chief technology officer at Microsoft, or as the author of Modernist Cuisine. They may also recall that he questioned a pair of papers in Nature about dinosaurs. In that vein, he has also been raising concerns about papers describing … Continue reading Two years of stonewalling: What happened when a scientist filed a public records request for NASA code
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