Search Results for: nature

“Editors are pleased to receive death threats on the third Thursday of the month:” A new journal launches

There’s a new journal in town. Inference’s first issue includes a lengthy review of a laboratory by a tennis instructor, a set of caricatures, and an exchange of emails from 1996 that is “perhaps, less remarkable for what it says than for the fact that it took place at all.” In short, its editors — … Continue reading “Editors are pleased to receive death threats on the third Thursday of the month:” A new journal launches

Weekend reads: “Too good to be true” results; the paper as an “artificial landmark”

The week at Retraction Watch kicked off with news of the European Science Foundation threatening to sue a scientist for calling a review process “flawed.” Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: Senator loses degree for plagiarism; bad colitis poetry; fraud on the big screen

The week at Retraction Watch featured papers by a fake author with a brilliant if profane name, and the unmasking of fraudster Diederik Stapel as a sock puppet. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Oxford group reverses authorship requirements for sharing data after questions from Retraction Watch

It seemed like an egregious violation of academic standards. A researcher forwarded us a data access agreement from the University of Oxford, in which Schedule 4 read as follows:

Weekend reads: How’d my name end up on that paper?; Bob Dylan in the scientific literature

The week at Retraction Watch featured yet another case of a researcher peer reviewing his own paper, and an odd defense of plagiarism. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

PubPeer Selections: Sniffing at a dog poop paper; how grants should be distributed

Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:

Weekend reads: A journal that will publish anything, even fake; Wakefield loses defamation suit appeal

This week at Retraction Watch featured revelations about legal threats to PubPeer, and a swift expression of concern for a paper denying the link between HIV and AIDS. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Is it time for a retraction penalty?

The title of this post is the headline of our most recent column in LabTimes, which begins: As we write this in mid-August, Nature has already retracted seven papers in 2014. That’s not yet a record – for that, you’d have to go back to 2003’s ten retractions, in the midst of the Jan Hendrik … Continue reading Is it time for a retraction penalty?

PubPeer Selections: “Meta-rant” about Science paper; posting raw data satisfies critics; was gel splicing ever OK?

Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:

Weekend reads: A scientific impostor, Retraction Watch comments lead to retractions

Here at Retraction Watch, the week featured the revelations of the peer reviews of an early version of the STAP stem cell paper, and an announcement about a new partnership. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: