Search Results for: arxiv

Do publishers add value? Maybe little, suggests preprint study of preprints

Academic publishers argue they add value to manuscripts by coordinating the peer-review process and editing manuscripts — but a new preliminary study suggests otherwise. The study — which is yet to be peer reviewed — found that papers published in traditional journals don’t change much from their preprint versions, suggesting publishers aren’t having as much of an influence … Continue reading Do publishers add value? Maybe little, suggests preprint study of preprints

Weekend reads: How to prove (and find) false claims; confessions of a wasteful scientist

This week at Retraction Watch featured what may be a record for plagiarism, a paper retracted because the device researchers claimed to use hadn’t arrive in the institution yet, and a technical glitch, which meant you may have missed some of our posts. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: Improper influence by NFL; dissertations for sale; how common is failure to reproduce?

The week at Retraction Watch featured controversy over an economics paper, and a report of a researcher who faked more than 70 experiments. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

One in 25 papers contains inappropriately duplicated images, screen finds

Elisabeth Bik, a microbiologist at Stanford, has for years been a behind-the-scenes force in scientific integrity, anonymously submitting reports on plagiarism and image duplication to journal editors. Now, she’s ready to come out of the shadows. With the help of two editors at microbiology journals, she has conducted a massive study looking for image duplication … Continue reading One in 25 papers contains inappropriately duplicated images, screen finds

Physicists retract Nature paper on Earth’s core after findings aren’t reproducible

Physicists have retracted a highly cited paper from Nature on the behavior of electrons at the center of the Earth after other researchers could not reproduce their findings. The 2015 paper earned coverage in Science News and Live Science, where co-author Ronald Cohen explained: There was a big problem in how you generate a magnetic field, and now, because of our … Continue reading Physicists retract Nature paper on Earth’s core after findings aren’t reproducible

Ready to geek out on retraction data? Read this new preprint

There’s a new paper about retractions, and it’s chock-full of the kind of data that we love to geek out on. Enjoy. The new paper, “A Multi-dimensional Investigation of the Effects of Publication Retraction on Scholarly Impact,” appears on the preprint server arXiv — meaning it has yet to be peer-reviewed — and is co-authored … Continue reading Ready to geek out on retraction data? Read this new preprint

Weekend reads: Go ahead, plagiarize and sabotage your colleagues; star surgeon’s days at Karolinska numbered

The week at Retraction Watch featured a case of a disappearing journal, lots of bad news for Olivier Voinnet, and advice on what to do when you make a mistake. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: A celebrity surgeon’s double life; misconduct in sports medicine; researcher loses honor

This week at Retraction Watch featured a literally bullshit excuse for fake data, a new record for time from publication to retraction, and news of an upcoming retraction from Science. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Weekend reads: NFL, NIH butt heads on concussion research; should all papers be anonymous?

The week at Retraction Watch featured our annual roundup of the year’s top retractions for The Scientist, a retraction from Science, and claims about a book Aristotle never wrote. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: