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 finding of plagiarism by a star health care policy researcher; a paper that contradicted itself; and the story of a researcher found to have committed misconduct on grants who is now publishing findings based on those grants. Here’s what was happening elsewhere: Continue reading Weekend reads: How junior scientists are mistreated; how to fix nutritional science; a journal does nothing after Monsanto ghostwriting claims

The similarities between recent papers in two different journals about energy were striking — so striking that a number of people have
A journal has retracted a 2016 article for a litany of flaws, including plagiarism and a massive self-inflicted wound that should have obviated the first offense.
Last year, an academic society recommended that journals retract nine papers by a researcher in Japan who collaborated with a notorious fraudster. Only two have been retracted.

When you think a retraction notice doesn’t tell the whole story, what should you do?